Abstract
Recent research has shown that generating words from fragments, relative to simply reading them, inhibits processing of order information. Nairne, Riegler, and Serra (1991) showed that this reduction in processing of order information leads to deficits in recall performance. In three experiments, we generally replicate Nairne et al.'s results and demonstrate that the deficit in recall for the generated items is dependent on the easy distractor task and the relatively short (30-sec) retention interval they used. When a difficult distractor task was used, generating produced a deficit in amount of order information processed, but actually facilitated recall when recall was delayed 80 sec. The results are consistent with the hypothesisthat generating words inhibits order processing, but they do not support the contention that the reduction in order pro~ cessing isresponsible for the deficit in recall that is sometimes observed for the generated items.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Asch, S. E., &Ebenholtz, S. M. (1962). The process offree recall: Evidence for non-associative factors in acquisition and retention.Journal of Psychology,54, 3–31.
Begg, I., &Snider, A. (1987). The generation effect: Evidence of generalized inhibition.Journal ofExperimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,13, 553–563.
Burns, D. J. (1986).Differential rates offorgetting: The exception or the rule? Unpublished doctoral dissertation, State University of New York at Binghamton.
Burns, D. J. (1990). The generation effect: A test between single- and multifactor theories.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,16, 1060–1067.
Burns, D. J. (1992). The consequences of generation.Journal ofMemory & Language,31, 615–633.
Einstein, G. O., McDaniel, M. A., Bowers, C. A., &Stevens, D. T. (1984). Memory for prose: The influence ofrelational and propositionspecific processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,10, 133–143.
Hirshman, E., &Bjork, R. A. (1988). The generation effect: Support for a two-factor theory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,14, 484–494.
Kroll, N. E., &Kelucutt, M. H. (1972). Short-term recall as a function of covert rehearsal and of intervening task.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,11, 196–204.
McDaniel, M. A., Waddill, P. J., &Einstein, G. O. (1988). A contextual account ofthe generation effect: Athree factor theory.Journal of Memory & Language,27, 521–536.
Nairne, J.S. (1990). Similarity and long-term memory for order.Journal of Memory & Language,29, 733–746.
Nairne, J. S., Riegler, G. L., &Serra, M. (1991). Dissociative effects of generation on item and order information.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,17, 702–709.
Schmidt, S. R., &Cherry, K. (1989). The negative generation effect: Delineation of a phenomenon.Memory & Cognition,17, 359–369.
Serra, M., &Nairne, J. S. (1993). Design controversies and the generation effect: Support for an item-order hypothesis.Memory & Cognition,21, 34–40.
Slamecka, N. J., &Graf, P., (1978). The generation effect: Delineation of a phenomenon.Journal ofExperimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory,4, 592–604.
Slamecka, N. J., &Katsaiti, L. T. (1987). The generation effect as an artifact of selective displaced rehearsal.JournalofMemory & Language,26, 589–607.
Snodgrass, J. G., &Vanderwart, M. (1980). A standardized set of 260 pictures: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory,6, 174–215.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
The importance of the item-order distinction in explaining the generation effect, as well as the role of the item-order distinction in the long-term-memory arena, is questioned.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Burns, D.J., Curti, E.T. & Lavin, J.C. The effects of generation on item and order retention in immediate and delayed recall. Mem Cogn 21, 846–852 (1993). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202752
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202752