Divided attention at retrieval disrupts knowing but not remembering

Lauren Knott, S. A Dewhurst

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The view that remember and know responses can be explained within a dual-process framework has recently been questioned (e.g., Gardiner, Konstantinou, Karayianni, & Gregg, 2005). The aims of the present study were to investigate further discrepancies between remember/know (R/K) studies and dual-process models of recognition memory. In two experiments participants were required to make old/new and R/K decisions under full and divided attention conditions. Experiment 1 used a two-step R/K procedure and showed that attention during retrieval reduced overall recognition performance. Experiment 2 used a one-step R/K procedure and showed that dividing attention at retrieval only affected know responses, suggesting that knowing but not remembering relies on controlled retrieval processes. These findings and findings from recent research provide evidence that is inconsistent with the dual-process explanation for R/K research.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)664-674
JournalMemory
Volume15
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2007

Fingerprint

Research
Remembering
Divided Attention
Experiment
Dual Process
Recognition (Psychology)
Controlled
Remember-know
Dual-process Models
Recognition Memory

Cite this

Knott, Lauren ; Dewhurst, S. A. / Divided attention at retrieval disrupts knowing but not remembering. In: Memory. 2007 ; Vol. 15, No. 6. pp. 664-674.
@article{f2f6374ba2134086b80d57c591c7787e,
title = "Divided attention at retrieval disrupts knowing but not remembering",
abstract = "The view that remember and know responses can be explained within a dual-process framework has recently been questioned (e.g., Gardiner, Konstantinou, Karayianni, & Gregg, 2005). The aims of the present study were to investigate further discrepancies between remember/know (R/K) studies and dual-process models of recognition memory. In two experiments participants were required to make old/new and R/K decisions under full and divided attention conditions. Experiment 1 used a two-step R/K procedure and showed that attention during retrieval reduced overall recognition performance. Experiment 2 used a one-step R/K procedure and showed that dividing attention at retrieval only affected know responses, suggesting that knowing but not remembering relies on controlled retrieval processes. These findings and findings from recent research provide evidence that is inconsistent with the dual-process explanation for R/K research.",
author = "Lauren Knott and Dewhurst, {S. A}",
year = "2007",
doi = "10.1080/09658210701467137",
language = "English",
volume = "15",
pages = "664--674",
journal = "Memory",
issn = "0965-8211",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
number = "6",

}

Divided attention at retrieval disrupts knowing but not remembering. / Knott, Lauren; Dewhurst, S. A.

In: Memory, Vol. 15, No. 6, 2007, p. 664-674.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Divided attention at retrieval disrupts knowing but not remembering

AU - Knott, Lauren

AU - Dewhurst, S. A

PY - 2007

Y1 - 2007

N2 - The view that remember and know responses can be explained within a dual-process framework has recently been questioned (e.g., Gardiner, Konstantinou, Karayianni, & Gregg, 2005). The aims of the present study were to investigate further discrepancies between remember/know (R/K) studies and dual-process models of recognition memory. In two experiments participants were required to make old/new and R/K decisions under full and divided attention conditions. Experiment 1 used a two-step R/K procedure and showed that attention during retrieval reduced overall recognition performance. Experiment 2 used a one-step R/K procedure and showed that dividing attention at retrieval only affected know responses, suggesting that knowing but not remembering relies on controlled retrieval processes. These findings and findings from recent research provide evidence that is inconsistent with the dual-process explanation for R/K research.

AB - The view that remember and know responses can be explained within a dual-process framework has recently been questioned (e.g., Gardiner, Konstantinou, Karayianni, & Gregg, 2005). The aims of the present study were to investigate further discrepancies between remember/know (R/K) studies and dual-process models of recognition memory. In two experiments participants were required to make old/new and R/K decisions under full and divided attention conditions. Experiment 1 used a two-step R/K procedure and showed that attention during retrieval reduced overall recognition performance. Experiment 2 used a one-step R/K procedure and showed that dividing attention at retrieval only affected know responses, suggesting that knowing but not remembering relies on controlled retrieval processes. These findings and findings from recent research provide evidence that is inconsistent with the dual-process explanation for R/K research.

U2 - 10.1080/09658210701467137

DO - 10.1080/09658210701467137

M3 - Article

VL - 15

SP - 664

EP - 674

JO - Memory

JF - Memory

SN - 0965-8211

IS - 6

ER -