Effects of retention intervals on receiver operating characteristics in artificial grammar learning

Richard J. Tunney; Gilbert Bezzina

doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2006.06.002

Effects of retention intervals on receiver operating characteristics in artificial grammar learning

Richard J. Tunney^*
, Gilbert Bezzina

^*Corresponding author for this work

College of Health and Life Sciences

Nottingham Trent University

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

20 Citations (SciVal)

Abstract

Current theories of memory suggest that recognition is composed of separate processes of familiarity and recollection (e.g. [Yonelinas, A. P. (2002). The nature of recollection and familiarity: a review of 30 years of research. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 441-517]). A key feature of these two processes is that they decay, or are forgotten at different rates. The dual-process model has also been useful in understanding artificial grammar learning. We obtained evidence for recollection and familiarity in artificial grammar learning by analyses of receiver operating characteristics (ROC). Furthermore we found that these were dissociated by retention intervals of 14 days. The slope of the zROC curves deviated reliably from 1 immediately after study and increased towards 1 suggesting that recollection contributed to recognition decisions but declined over the 14-day period leaving familiarity as the only basis for recognition. These data show similar patterns to those observed in word-recognition [Gardiner, J. M., & Java, R. I. (1991). Forgetting in recognition memory with and without recollective experience. Memory & Cognition, 19, 617-623; Tunney, R. J. (submitted for publication). Changes in the subjective experience of recognition over time suggest independent processes] and confirm the view that recollection and familiarity are implicated in artificial grammar learning. Moreover, the data confirm the finding that recollection and familiarity-based memory show different patterns of forgetting.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	37-50
Number of pages	14
Journal	Acta Psychologica
Volume	125
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2006.06.002
Publication status	Published - 1 May 2007

Funding

This research was supported by a grant from the UK Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC RES-000-22-0507-A). Thanks to Gordon Fernie, Phil Higham, and Annette Kinder for many helpful discussions. Appendix A List 1 List 2 List 3 Grammatical items MVR MVXRVMT MVRVM MVXRMXR MVXRVVM MVRVVVM MVXRVMR MVXRVVV MVXRMVR MVXTR MXRTVMT MVXRV MXRMVRM MXTRRRX MVXTX MXRMVXT MXTRRX MXR MXRMXT VMRMVRV MXRMVRV MXRTMXR VMRMXRV MXRMVXR MXRTMXT VMRTMXT MXRMXRM MXRTVMR VMRVMT MXRMXRV MXRVM VMRVVVV MXRTMVR MXTRRR VMRVXTR MXRTVXT VMR VMRVXVR MXRVVVM VMRMVXT VMTRRRX MXRVXT VMRVMR VXTRRRX VMRMVXR VMRVVVM VXTRRX VMRMXTR VMRVXVT VXVR VMRTVXT VMTRRRR VXVRMVR VMT VXVRMXT VXVRVM VXTRRR VXVT VXVRVV VXVRMXR VXVTRRX VXVRVXT VXVTRRR List 4 List 5 List 6 Ungrammatical items MRTXXMT MTRXRX MMVRVVV MRV MTXRRXR MRVVX MRXMMVR MVRXMVT MRVVXVM MRXTXMR MVVRMXV MRVXTX MTRXRR MVXVVRV MRX MVMXRRX MXMRTVT MVVMR MVRVXRM VMMTRTX MXMRRXM MXMXRT VMXVRRV MXMVRRV MXVMR VRMVMRX MXMVRXR MXVRT VRRMVXT MXMXRVR MXVRTRM VRVVMVV MXTRMRV MXVTMRX VRVXMV MXVRXMR VMMRXVT VRXV MXVTTRX VMXVRTR VTMVRM MXVTX VRM VTRMRRX VMMRXVR VRMRMV VTRXRRX VMMXRTR VRMRTRR VVMVMRR VMXTTRV VRVMVVM VXRTVXV VRXVXRM VVTX VXRTXR VTM VXMTVVR VXRVMRV VTRRXR VXRTVRX VXVVRV VXRRTVR

Keywords

Artificial grammar
Confidence
Forgetting
Implicit learning

Access to Document

10.1016/j.actpsy.2006.06.002

Cite this

@article{15af68736ac044b7b202f2aa6825b50a,

title = "Effects of retention intervals on receiver operating characteristics in artificial grammar learning",

abstract = "Current theories of memory suggest that recognition is composed of separate processes of familiarity and recollection (e.g. [Yonelinas, A. P. (2002). The nature of recollection and familiarity: a review of 30 years of research. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 441-517]). A key feature of these two processes is that they decay, or are forgotten at different rates. The dual-process model has also been useful in understanding artificial grammar learning. We obtained evidence for recollection and familiarity in artificial grammar learning by analyses of receiver operating characteristics (ROC). Furthermore we found that these were dissociated by retention intervals of 14 days. The slope of the zROC curves deviated reliably from 1 immediately after study and increased towards 1 suggesting that recollection contributed to recognition decisions but declined over the 14-day period leaving familiarity as the only basis for recognition. These data show similar patterns to those observed in word-recognition [Gardiner, J. M., \& Java, R. I. (1991). Forgetting in recognition memory with and without recollective experience. Memory \& Cognition, 19, 617-623; Tunney, R. J. (submitted for publication). Changes in the subjective experience of recognition over time suggest independent processes] and confirm the view that recollection and familiarity are implicated in artificial grammar learning. Moreover, the data confirm the finding that recollection and familiarity-based memory show different patterns of forgetting.",

keywords = "Artificial grammar, Confidence, Forgetting, Implicit learning",

author = "Tunney, \{Richard J.\} and Gilbert Bezzina",

year = "2007",

month = may,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.actpsy.2006.06.002",

language = "English",

volume = "125",

pages = "37--50",

journal = "Acta Psychologica",

issn = "0001-6918",

publisher = "Elsevier",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effects of retention intervals on receiver operating characteristics in artificial grammar learning

AU - Tunney, Richard J.

AU - Bezzina, Gilbert

PY - 2007/5/1

Y1 - 2007/5/1

N2 - Current theories of memory suggest that recognition is composed of separate processes of familiarity and recollection (e.g. [Yonelinas, A. P. (2002). The nature of recollection and familiarity: a review of 30 years of research. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 441-517]). A key feature of these two processes is that they decay, or are forgotten at different rates. The dual-process model has also been useful in understanding artificial grammar learning. We obtained evidence for recollection and familiarity in artificial grammar learning by analyses of receiver operating characteristics (ROC). Furthermore we found that these were dissociated by retention intervals of 14 days. The slope of the zROC curves deviated reliably from 1 immediately after study and increased towards 1 suggesting that recollection contributed to recognition decisions but declined over the 14-day period leaving familiarity as the only basis for recognition. These data show similar patterns to those observed in word-recognition [Gardiner, J. M., & Java, R. I. (1991). Forgetting in recognition memory with and without recollective experience. Memory & Cognition, 19, 617-623; Tunney, R. J. (submitted for publication). Changes in the subjective experience of recognition over time suggest independent processes] and confirm the view that recollection and familiarity are implicated in artificial grammar learning. Moreover, the data confirm the finding that recollection and familiarity-based memory show different patterns of forgetting.

AB - Current theories of memory suggest that recognition is composed of separate processes of familiarity and recollection (e.g. [Yonelinas, A. P. (2002). The nature of recollection and familiarity: a review of 30 years of research. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 441-517]). A key feature of these two processes is that they decay, or are forgotten at different rates. The dual-process model has also been useful in understanding artificial grammar learning. We obtained evidence for recollection and familiarity in artificial grammar learning by analyses of receiver operating characteristics (ROC). Furthermore we found that these were dissociated by retention intervals of 14 days. The slope of the zROC curves deviated reliably from 1 immediately after study and increased towards 1 suggesting that recollection contributed to recognition decisions but declined over the 14-day period leaving familiarity as the only basis for recognition. These data show similar patterns to those observed in word-recognition [Gardiner, J. M., & Java, R. I. (1991). Forgetting in recognition memory with and without recollective experience. Memory & Cognition, 19, 617-623; Tunney, R. J. (submitted for publication). Changes in the subjective experience of recognition over time suggest independent processes] and confirm the view that recollection and familiarity are implicated in artificial grammar learning. Moreover, the data confirm the finding that recollection and familiarity-based memory show different patterns of forgetting.

KW - Artificial grammar

KW - Confidence

KW - Forgetting

KW - Implicit learning

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/34147093691

UR - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001691806000746?via%3Dihub

U2 - 10.1016/j.actpsy.2006.06.002

DO - 10.1016/j.actpsy.2006.06.002

M3 - Article

C2 - 16899208

AN - SCOPUS:34147093691

SN - 0001-6918

VL - 125

SP - 37

EP - 50

JO - Acta Psychologica

JF - Acta Psychologica

IS - 1

ER -

Effects of retention intervals on receiver operating characteristics in artificial grammar learning

Abstract

Funding

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this