↓ Skip to main content

Negative effects of item repetition on source memory

Overview of attention for article published in Memory & Cognition, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 Mendeley
Title
Negative effects of item repetition on source memory
Published in
Memory & Cognition, March 2012
DOI 10.3758/s13421-012-0196-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kyungmi Kim, Do-Joon Yi, Carol L. Raye, Marcia K. Johnson

Abstract

In the present study, we explored how item repetition affects source memory for new item-feature associations (picture-location or picture-color). We presented line drawings varying numbers of times in Phase 1. In Phase 2, each drawing was presented once with a critical new feature. In Phase 3, we tested memory for the new source feature of each item from Phase 2. Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrated and replicated the negative effects of item repetition on incidental source memory. Prior item repetition also had a negative effect on source memory when different source dimensions were used in Phases 1 and 2 (Experiment 3) and when participants were explicitly instructed to learn source information in Phase 2 (Experiments 4 and 5). Importantly, when the order between Phases 1 and 2 was reversed, such that item repetition occurred after the encoding of critical item-source combinations, item repetition no longer affected source memory (Experiment 6). Overall, our findings did not support predictions based on item predifferentiation, within-dimension source interference, or general interference from multiple traces of an item. Rather, the findings were consistent with the idea that prior item repetition reduces attention to subsequent presentations of the item, decreasing the likelihood that critical item-source associations will be encoded.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
Austria 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Nigeria 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 73 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 27%
Researcher 14 18%
Student > Master 13 16%
Other 5 6%
Student > Bachelor 4 5%
Other 12 15%
Unknown 10 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 40 51%
Neuroscience 8 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 9%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Computer Science 3 4%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 12 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 September 2016.
All research outputs
#15,622,880
of 24,749,767 outputs
Outputs from Memory & Cognition
#888
of 1,623 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,365
of 160,795 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Memory & Cognition
#4
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,749,767 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,623 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 160,795 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.