Within memory processing, feature and conjunction effects refer to higher false alarms (incorrectly naming items as previously seen) for stimuli with partial/all features taken from different previously studied versus novel items. In this study, we compared feature–conjunction effects in the memory tasks of both item recognition and source retrieval, using faces as stimuli. We found greater feature–conjunction effects on source retrieval versus item recognition tasks, though participants gave slower responses on source retrieval versus item recognition. Thus, our data were consistent with dual-process memory theory in which familiarity contributes to high false alarms in compound faces even while feature–conjunction effects enhance recollection in source retrieval.

Collaborative recall by groups of people can evoke both memory detriments (e.g., collaborative inhibition) and benefits (e.g., error pruning and post-collaborative memory benefit). Yet, it remains indeterminate whether these effects are due to the emotional valence of stimuli and/or the specific subtypes of episodic memory tested (i.e., item memory and source memory), and whether they are related to the research procedure of directed forgetting (DF). We introduced item-method DF into collaborative memory research using a turn-taking procedure. The to-be-recalled words were studied in different emotional valences and were followed by either an R or F cue, which, respectively, instructed participants to remember or forget the words presented. We conducted two recall sessions (Recall 1 and Recall 2) that included the two subtypes of episodic memory. Recall 1 was performed either individually or collaboratively, while Recall 2 was always performed individually. We observed three major findings: (a) a collaborative memory decrement - collaborative inhibition - was minimally affected in both item memory and source memory tasks by either the emotional valence of the stimuli or the DF cue; (b) a collaborative memory benefit - error pruning of item memory - persisted within both ongoing and post-collaboration, while error pruning of source memory only presented in ongoing collaboration, thus demonstrating the relevance of dual-process models that differentiate automatic familiarity and effortful recollection processes; and (c) there was no post-collaborative memory benefit, indicating the importance of the type of collaborative procedure. We discuss these results in terms of various theories, including the retrieval strategy disruption hypothesis (RSDH) which asserts that memory strategies tend to be disrupted in collaboration but are facilitated within post-collaboration. Also, we describe the implications of these results and directions for exploring other influential factors in future research.

Previous investigations have demonstrated FN400 and LPC, 2 event-related potential old/new effects that respectively reflect familiarity- and recollection-based processes in memory. However, it is unclear whether these effects are susceptible to processing fluency, particularly different types of processing fluency. To address this issue, applying a masked priming paradigm, we conducted an event-related potential experiment by manipulating semantic relations between the prime and the target as identical (reflecting perceptual fluency), thematically and taxonomically related (referring to conceptual fluency), and unrelated. A remember/know (R/K) judgment task in the test phase was used to distinguish familiarity- and recollection-based processes. Behaviorally, both task performance and response speed were modulated by the variables of priming condition, item type, and response type. All 4 priming conditions elicited significant FN400 and LPC. Compared with the K response, the R response was more relevant to the recollection-based processes reflected by LPC. Both FN400 and LPC were modulated by whether there was a response of R, K, or new. The former was susceptible only to conceptual fluency, and the latter was sensitive to both perceptual fluency and conceptual fluency, which offered telling evidence for the dual process model. Considerations for future investigations are proposed. See supplemental materials here: https://www.press.uillinois.edu/journals/ajp/media/evidence_in_remember_know_paradigm/