Browsing by Author "Kelly, Megan O."

Now showing 1 - 8 of 8

Offloading information to an external store increases false recall.
(Elsevier, 2020) Lu, Xinyi; Kelly, Megan O.; Risko, Evan F.
Offloading to-be-remembered information is a ubiquitous memory strategy, yet in relying on external memory stores, our ability to recall from internal memory is often diminished. In the present investigation, we examine how offloading impacts true and false recall. Across three experiments, participants studied and wrote down word lists that were each strongly associated with an unstudied critical word. Recall in the Offloading condition (i.e., when they were told that they would have access to their written lists during recall) was contrasted with a No-Offloading condition (i.e., when they were told that they would not have access to their written lists during recall). We found that offloading decreased true recall of presented words while increasing false recall for unpresented critical words. Results are discussed in terms of offloading’s differential effects on the formation of gist and verbatim traces during encoding.
On our susceptibility to external memory store manipulation: examining the influence of perceived reliability and expected access to an external store.
(Taylor & Francis, 2022) Pereira, April E.; Kelly, Megan O.; Lu, Xinyi; Risko, Evan F.
Offloading memory to external stores (e.g., a saved file) allows us to evade the limitations of our internal memory. One cost of this strategy is that the external memory store used may be accessible to others, and thus, manipulated. Here we examine how reducing the perceived reliability of an external memory store may impact participants’ susceptibility to its manipulation (i.e., endorsing manipulated information as authentic). Across two pre-registered experiments, participants were able to store to-be-remembered information in an external store and on two critical trials, we surreptitiously manipulated the information in that store. Results demonstrate that an explicit notification of a previous manipulation, a reduction in perceived reliability, can decrease susceptibility to manipulation of the external memory store.
Productions need not match study items to confer a production advantage, but it helps.
(Hogrefe, 2024) Kelly, Megan O.; Lu, Xinyi; Ensor, Tyler M.; MacLeod, Colin M.; Risko, Evan F.
The production effect is the finding that, relative to silent reading, producing information at study (e.g., reading aloud) leads to a benefit in memory. In most studies of this effect, individuals are presented with a set of unique items, and they produce a subset of these items (e.g., they are presented with the to-be-remembered target item TABLE and produce “table”) such that the production is both unique and representative of the target. Across two preregistered experiments, we examined the influence of a production that is unique but that does not match the target (e.g., producing “fence” to the target TABLE, producing “car” to the target TREE, and so on). This kind of production also yielded a significant effect—the mismatching production effect—although it was smaller than the standard production effect (i.e., when productions are both unique and representative of their targets) and was detectable only when targets with "standard" productions were included in the same study phase (i.e., when the type of production was manipulated within participant). We suggest that target-production matching is an important precursor to the production effect, and that the kind of production that brings about a benefit depends on the other productions that are present.
Reducing retrieval time modulates the production effect: Empirical evidence and computational accounts.
(Elsevier, 2022) Kelly, Megan O.; Ensor, Tyler M.; Lu, Xinyi; MacLeod, Colin M.; Risko, Evan F.
Memory is reliably better for information read aloud relative to information read silently—the production effect. Three preregistered experiments examined whether the production effect arises from a more time-consuming retrieval process operating at test that benefits items that were produced at study. Participants studied items either aloud or silently and then completed a recognition test which required responding within a short deadline, under the assumption that a time-consuming retrieval process would be less able to operate when less time was available. Results generally supported this prediction. Even under speeded responding instructions, however, there was a robust production effect, suggesting that other, more rapid, processes also contribute to the production effect. Based on two extant verbal accounts, a computational model of the production effect using REM is introduced.
Study effort and the memory cost of external store availability.
(Elsevier, 2022) Kelly, Megan O.; Risko, Evan F.
Previous work demonstrates that individuals often recall less information if, at study, there is expectation that an external memory store will be available at test. One explanation for this effect is that when individuals can expect access to an external memory store, they forgo intentional, controlled efforts at encoding. The present work offers a novel test of this account by examining study effort, indexed by study time and self reported strategy use, as a function of instructed external store availability. In two preregistered experiments, participants studied lists of to-be- remembered items for a free recall test and were either instructed that they could use their study list to support them at test or that they could not. Critically, participants controlled their own study time, and no participant had their study list at test, regardless of instruction. Consistent with the effort at encoding account, external store availability influenced both study time and strategy use, and there was evidence that these effects mediated the influence of external store availability on recall performance. Interestingly, much of the memory cost remained when controlling for study effort, thus, suggesting that the cost is potentially multiply determined.
The gist of it: offloading memory does not reduce the benefit of list categorisation.
(Taylor & Francis, 2022) Lu, Xinyi; Kelly, Megan O.; Risko, Evan F.
When we can offload to-be-remembered information to an external store, our ability to recall that information from internal memory can be diminished. However, previous research has suggested that associative memory processes may remain intact in the face of offloading behavior. In the present investigation, we examine how the opportunity to offload memory demands affects the learning of categorized word lists. Across six experiments, participants studied and wrote down word lists that were either strongly associated with a semantic theme (categorized) or word lists that consisted of the same set of words but shuffled across the categorized lists (shuffled). When participants expected to have access to their written lists during the recall test (i.e., a condition that would encourage offloading) but were not given access to it, we found the typical recall advantage for categorized lists. This effect was found to be the same size or larger compared to a condition where participants did not expect to have access to their written lists during the recall test (i.e., a condition that would not allow offloading). We propose that gist memory supported by semantic associations is not substantially reduced in offloading.
The isolation effect when offloading memory
(Elsevier, 2019) Kelly, Megan O.; Risko, Evan F.
Offloading is a widespread and vital strategy for remembering. Yet, we lack a deep understanding of the mechanisms involved during the offloading of to-be-remembered information. One hypothesis is that offloading information is associated with a reduced engagement of top-down mnemonic strategies. A resulting prediction is that phenomena not solely by-products of such mechanisms should remain during offloading. We tested this prediction using the isolation effect (when recall is better for distinct items relative to nondistinct items). Participants had to remember lists of items (words) and, in most cases, were told that they could rely on an external store. On one trial, this expectation was violated, and participants had to unexpectedly rely on their internal/biological memory. Consistent with the prediction, results demonstrate a robust isolation effect irrespective of whether individuals could offload. The findings suggest that memory for distinct events is less susceptible to the typical cost of offloading to-be-remembered information.
The prod eff: Partially producing items moderates the production effect.
(Springer, 2024) Kelly, Megan O.; Ensor, Tyler M.; MacLeod, Colin M.; Risko, Evan F.
Current accounts of the production effect suggest that production leads to the encoding of additional production-associated features and/or better feature encoding. Thus, if it is the act of production that leads to the storage and/or enhanced encoding of these features, then less of this act should reduce the resulting production effect. In two experiments, we provide a direct test of his idea by manipulating how much of a given item is produced within a single mode of production (typing). Results demonstrate that such partial production can yield a significant production effect that is smaller than the effect that emerges from producing the entire item. These results suggest that how much of an item is produced can moderate the size of the production effect and are considered in the context of recent modelling efforts.