No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
There is more to memory than recollection and familiarity
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 January 2020
Abstract
Theoretical models of memory retrieval have focused on processes of recollection and familiarity. Research suggests that there are still other processes involved in memory reconstruction, leading to experiences of knowing and inferring the past. Understanding these experiences, and the cognitive processes that give rise to them, seems likely to further expand our understanding of the neural substrates of memory.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2020
References
Anderson, J. R. & Bower, G. H. (1972) Recognition and retrieval processes in free recall. Psychological Review 79(2):97–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartlett, F. C. (1932) Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Coltheart, M. (2006) What has functional neuroimaging told us about the mind (so far)? Cortex 42:323–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gallistel, C. R. (1999) Themes of thought and thinking [Review of The Nature of Cognition, ed. by R. J. Sternberg]. Science 285:842–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallo, D. A. (2010) False memories and fantastic beliefs: 15 years of the DRM illusion. Memory & Cognition 38:833–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gardiner, J. M. (1988) Functional aspects of recollective experience. Memory & Cognition 16:309–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hatfield, G. (2000) The brain's “new” science: Psychology, neurophysiology, and constraint. Philosophy of Science 67(3):388–404. Available at: https://philarchive.org/archive/HATTBN.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacoby, L. L. (1991) A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory. Journal of Memory and Language 13:513–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kassin, S. M. (2008) False confessions: Causes, consequences, and implications for reform. Current Directions in Psychological Science 17(4):249–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kassin, S. M. (2017) False confessions: How can psychology so basic be so counterintuitive? American Psychologist 72(9):951–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kihlstrom, J. F. (1998) Exhumed memory. In: Truth in memory, ed. Lynn, S. J. & McConkey, K. M., pp. 3–31. Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Kihlstrom, J. F. (2006) Trauma and memory revisited. In: Memory and emotions: Interdisciplinary perspectives, ed. Uttl, B., Ohta, N. & Siegenthaler, A. L., pp. 259–91. Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kihlstrom, J. F. (2010) Social neuroscience: The footprints of Phineas Gage. Social Cognition 28(6):757–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knott, L. M., Dewhurst, S. A. & Howe, M. L. (2012) What factors underlie associative and categorical memory illusions? The roles of backward associative strength and interitem connectivity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 38(1):229–39.Google ScholarPubMed
Loftus, E. F. (2005) Planting misinformation in the human mind: A 30-year investigation of the malleability of memory. Learning and Memory 12(4):361–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loftus, E. F. & Palmer, J. C. (1974) Reconstruction of automobile destruction: An example of the interaction between language and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 13:585–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mandler, G. (1980) Recognizing: The judgement of previous occurence. Psychological Review 87(3):252–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ranganath, C. & Ritchey, M. (2012) Two cortical systems for memory-guided behaviour. Nature Reviews: Neuroscience 13:1–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roediger, H. L. (1996) Memory illusions. Journal of Memory and Language 35:76–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roediger, H. L. III & McDermott, K. B. (1995) Creating false memories: Remembering words not presented in lists. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 21:803–14.Google Scholar
Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B., Tindell, D. R., Sifonis, C. M. & Wilkenfeld, M. J. (2000) Category structure and created memories. Memory & Cognition 28(3):386–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yonelinas, A. P. (2002) The nature of recollection and familiarity: A review of 30 years of research. Journal of Memory and Language 46(3):441–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Target article
An integrative memory model of recollection and familiarity to understand memory deficits
Related commentaries (22)
Cognitive control constrains memory attributions
Cutting out the middleman: Separating attributional biases from memory deficits
Dual processes in memory: Evidence from memory of time-of-occurrence of events
Entities also require relational coding and binding
Episodic memory is emotionally laden memory, requiring amygdala involvement
Fluency: A trigger of familiarity for relational representations?
Global matching and fluency attribution in familiarity assessment
How do memory modules differentially contribute to familiarity and recollection?
Improving the integrative memory model by integrating the temporal dynamics of memory
Priming recognition memory test cues: No evidence for an attributional basis of recollection
Refining the bigger picture: On the integrative memory model
Representational formats in medial temporal lobe and neocortex also determine subjective memory features
The integrative memory model is detailed, but skimps on false memories and development
The other side of the coin: Semantic dementia as a lesion model for understanding recollection and familiarity
The role of anxiety in the integrative memory model
The role of reference frames in memory recollection
The subjective experience of recollection and familiarity in Alzheimer's disease
The ventral lateral parietal cortex in episodic memory: From content to attribution
There is more to memory than recollection and familiarity
Two processes are not necessary to understand memory deficits
Understanding misidentification syndromes using the integrative memory model
What face familiarity feelings say about the lateralization of specific entities within the core system
Author response
Interactions with the integrative memory model