↓ Skip to main content

Does category labeling lead to forgetting?

Overview of attention for article published in Cognitive Processing, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
Title
Does category labeling lead to forgetting?
Published in
Cognitive Processing, October 2012
DOI 10.1007/s10339-012-0530-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nathaniel Blanco, Todd Gureckis

Abstract

What effect does labeling an object as a member of a familiar category have on memory for that object? Recent studies suggest that recognition memory can be negatively impacted by categorizing objects during encoding. This paper examines the "representational shift hypothesis" which argues that categorizing an object impairs recognition memory by altering the trace of the encoded memory to be more similar to the category prototype. Previous evidence for this idea comes from experiments in which a basic-level category labeling task was compared to a non-category labeling incidental encoding task, usually a preference judgment (e.g., "Do you like this item?"). In two experiments, we examine alternative tasks that attempt to control for processing demands and the degree to which category information is explicitly recruited at the time of study. Contrary to the predictions of the representational shift hypothesis, we find no evidence that memory is selectively impaired by category labeling. Overall, the pattern of results across both studies appears consistent with well-established variables known to influence memory such as encoding specificity and distinctiveness effects.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 4%
Russia 1 2%
Unknown 46 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 31%
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Researcher 7 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 6%
Professor 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 9 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 30 61%
Linguistics 2 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 8 16%