Abstract
A well-established finding in the sentence recognition paradigm of Bransford and Franks has been that recognition ratings increase as the number of ideas in the test sentences increases, with no difference in ratings for old and new sentences. Two major explanations of this phenomenon have been proposed. One, offered by Bransford and Franks, assumes subjects combine ideas in related sentences into single conceptual schemas and store little information about specific sentences. A second, set forth by Reitman and Bower, allows for more specific memory based on familiarity tags attached to ordered units and subunits of each sentence, such tags then being used as the basis of responding to test sentences. The relative plausibility of these two positions was evaluated by varying the precise nature of sentences seen in acquisition and recognition. Results generally favored the Bransford and Franks theory, but an unanticipated outcome suggested a possible modification of that theory.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
