↓ Skip to main content

Event models and the fan effect

Overview of attention for article published in Memory & Cognition, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Event models and the fan effect
Published in
Memory & Cognition, May 2017
DOI 10.3758/s13421-017-0713-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

G. A. Radvansky, Andrea E. O’Rear, Jerry S. Fisher

Abstract

The current study explored the persistence of event model organizations and how this influences the experience of interference during retrieval. People in this study memorized lists of sentences about objects in locations, such as "The potted palm is in the hotel." Previous work has shown that such information can either be stored in separate event models, thereby producing retrieval interference, or integrated into common event models, thereby eliminating retrieval interference. Unlike prior studies, the current work explored the impact of forgetting up to 2 weeks later on this pattern of performance. We explored three possible outcomes across the various retention intervals. First, consistent with research showing that longer delays reduce proactive and retroactive interference, any retrieval interference effects of competing event models could be reduced over time. Second, the binding of information into events models may weaken over time, causing interference effects to emerge when they had previously been absent. Third, and finally, the organization of information into event models could remain stable over long periods of time. The results reported here are most consistent with the last outcome. While there were some minor variations across the various retention intervals, the basic pattern of event model organization remained preserved over the two-week retention period.

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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 21%
Student > Master 5 18%
Researcher 3 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Other 6 21%
Unknown 4 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 9 32%
Neuroscience 5 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Design 2 7%
Sports and Recreations 2 7%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 5 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 31 July 2017.
All research outputs
#20,134,296
of 24,749,767 outputs
Outputs from Memory & Cognition
#1,431
of 1,623 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#245,377
of 318,521 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Memory & Cognition
#14
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,749,767 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 318,521 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.