
doi: 10.3758/bf03197623
pmid: 7087767
High-frequency words are recalled better than are low-frequency words, but low-frequency words produce higher hit rates in a recognition test than do high-frequency words. Two experiments provided new date on the phenomenon and also evidence relevant to the dual process model of recognition, which postulates that recognition judgments are a function of increments in item familiarity and of item retrievability. First, recall and recognition by subjects who initially performed a single lexical decision task were compared with those of subjects who also gave definitions of high-, low-, and very low-frequency target words. In the second experiment, subjects initially performed either a semantic, elaborative task or an integrative task that focused attention on the physical, perceptual features of the same words. Both experiments showed that extensive elaborative processing results in higher recall and hit rates but lower false alarm rates, whereas word frequency has a monotonic, linear effect on recall and false alarm rates, but a paradoxical, curvilinear effect on hit rates. Elaboration is apparently more effective when the potential availability of meaningful connections with other structures is greater (as for high-frequency words). The results are consistent with the dual process model.
Form Perception, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Memory, Decision Making, Mental Recall, Humans, Models, Psychological, Semantics
Form Perception, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Memory, Decision Making, Mental Recall, Humans, Models, Psychological, Semantics
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 80 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 1% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
