1

Cueing on recall (Memory Experiment)

Soukhya Gajendra Vispute

ADT23SVSB0089

School of Vedic Sciences, MIT - ADT University

23PSY 1003: Fundamental of Psychological Testing (SEC)

Prof. Keerthana Periyandavar

April 12, 2024

 2

Purpose

Cueing in recall memory experiments helps researchers understand memory processes

and factors influencing recall performance. It contributes to educational practices, eyewitness

testimony reliability, and cognitive interventions for memory disorders.

Introduction

Definition

Memory refers to the cognitive process of encoding, storing, and retrieving

information over time. It involves the retention and recall of past experiences, knowledge,

skills, and perceptions. Memory is essential for learning, problem-solving, decision-making,

and forming personal identity. It is a complex and multifaceted process influenced by various

factors such as attention, perception, emotion, and context. Memory can be categorized into

different types, including sensory memory, short-term memory, and long-term memory, each

with distinct characteristics and mechanisms.

Cueing of memory: Philip Zimbardo, et.al (2004), while prominent in psychology, are

not specifically known for their work on retrieval cues. However, retrieval cues are stimuli or

reminders that facilitate memory recall. They can be environmental, contextual, semantic, or

emotional triggers that help access stored information. While Zimbardo's work focuses on

social influence and Baron's on cognitive processes, their contributions indirectly relate to

memory and cognition, but not specifically to retrieval cues.

 3

History:

In various periods, experiments have been conducted utilizing a particular principle.

Some stood out as important and had a strong impact. In an experiment conducted by Tulving

and Pearlstone (1966), participants were given a list of words to recall. The terms came from

distinct groups like bird species (pigeon, sparrow), types of furniture (chair, dresser), and

career titles (engineer, lawyer). The original list did not clearly show the categories. Those in

the free recall group were instructed to jot down all the words they could recollect from the

list.

The cued recall group was also required to remember the words, but they were given

the category names "birds," "furniture," and "professions." Tulving and Pearlstone's study

shows that memory is improved with the help of retrieval cues. Individuals in the group that

were asked to recall freely remembered 40 percent of the words, while those in the group that

were given cues to help them remember remembered 75 percent of the words. The article

they wrote in 1966 discussed their test and its explanation of the Availability and

Accessibility of Information in memory of Words.

 4

Theories

1. The encoding specificity principle is a cognitive principle stating that an individual’s

recall of information is enhanced when the environment in which they originally

learned something is similar to the environment in which they are attempting to recall

it. It states that associating material with its context or situation can help people

retrieve it more easily.

When we use the same smell in exam which we used while studying we are more likely

to remember.

For example, if an individual studied an AP psychology while sitting in the same

chair, they may be more likely to remember what they learned when sitting in that same chair

again rather than another one.

Furthermore, cues such as smells, sounds, or other environmental features can also help

enhance recall under this principle.

2. State dependent memory

When we learn information, we also encode details about the environment in which

we learned the information and the physical and emotional state we are in at the time.

Example: visiting college for the first time or while experiencing an accident in person

Spreading activation model:

Example: learning a new instrument

3. The ACT theory of factual memory is presented. According to this theory,

information is encoded in an all-or-none manner into cognitive units and the strength

of these units increases with practice and decays with delay. The essential process to

memory performance is the retrieval operation. It is proposed that the cognitive units
 5

form an interconnected network and that retrieval is performed by spreading

activation throughout the network. Level of activation in the network determines rate

and probability of recall. With these assumptions in place, the ACT theory is shown to

predict interference results in memory, judgements of associative relatedness, impact

of extensive practice on memory, the differences between recognition and recall,

effects of elaborative processing, and effects of reconstructive. For example, if you

prime a person with the word water, and then afterward ask them to name a mammal,

they're more likely to say whale than some other mammal.

Description of the Test

Name of the test:

Retrieval in cued recall test by Linda Bakers (1968), three experiments examined

retrieval in a cued recall paradigm by manipulating the pattern of output cues.

About the author:

Dr. Linda Baker is a Psychologist, Assistant Professor - Standing Appointment, and

the former Learning Director of the Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against

Women & Children (CREVAWC) at Western University.

During her time with CREVAWC, Dr. Baker led the Learning Network and the Knowledge

Hub. The Learning Network translates knowledge on the continuum of gender-based violence

and the Knowledge Hub facilitates a trauma- and violence-informed community of practice

with Canadian researchers and practitioners conducting innovative intervention research.

She has over 25 years of experience in the mental health and justice systems, working with

and learning from children, youth and families dealing with experiences of violence and

trauma. Her direct service experience inspires and informs her research and commitment to
 6

knowledge translation through resource development and publications, knowledge exchange

activities, and workshop presentations.

Dr. Baker has co-authored numerous publications/resources related to intimate partner

violence exposed children and families, including Walk Proud, Dance Proud: Footprints on a

Healing Journey; Helping Children Thrive: Supporting Woman Abuse Survivors as Mothers;

and Helping an Abused Woman: 101 things to Know, Say and Do. Her most recent work

focuses on the application of intersectionality to research with and services for children

exposed to IPV and the evaluation of IPV training programs.

Prior to her current roles, Dr. Baker was the Director of the Centre for Children and

Families in the Justice System (London Family Court Clinic). She participates regularly on

faculty teams delivering Domestic Violence Institutes throughout the United States for the

National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges and Futures Without Violence.

Citation ("Dr. Linda Baker, retired learning director," n.d.)

Design of the test

Context-dependent memory. Participants are divided into groups and exposed to

different learning environments or states. For example, one group might learn a list of words

in a classroom setting, while another group learns the same list of words in a park. After a

delay, participants are asked to recall the words they learned. Some participants from each

group are asked to recall the words in the same environment or state where they learned

them, while others are asked to recall the words in a different environment or state. This

design allows researchers to compare the recall performance of participants who are in the

same context as their learning environment with those who are in a different context. This

comparison helps determine the extent to which memory recall is influenced by the similarity

between the encoding and retrieval contexts. The design also allows for variations, such as
 7

manipulating the degree of similarity between the encoding and retrieval contexts or testing

different types of contextual cues (e.g., physical surroundings, emotional states) to

understand their impact on memory recall. Overall, the design of the test aims to provide

insights into how environmental context affects memory retrieval, shedding light on the

mechanisms underlying context-dependent memory phenomena.

Goals of the test:

The main goal of a cueing on recall memory experiment is to investigate how

providing cues affects a person's ability to remember information. Researchers typically

expect that cues will enhance recall compared to no cues at all. It is also found helpful in

learning and development.

The goals of a cueing on recall memory experiment typically revolve around

understanding how different types of cues or prompts affect memory recall. Specifically,

researchers might aim to investigate:

1. Effectiveness of Cues: The experiment may seek to determine which types of cues or

prompts are most effective in aiding recall. This could include studying visual,

auditory, semantic, or other types of cues.

2. Memory Retrieval Processes: Researchers might aim to gain insights into the

underlying processes involved in memory retrieval. By studying how cues facilitate

recall, they can better understand how memories are accessed and retrieved from

storage.

3. Memory Enhancement Strategies: Understanding how cues impact recall can lead to

the development of strategies to enhance memory performance. This could have

practical applications in education, cognitive rehabilitation, and other fields.

 8

4. Cue Specificity: Researchers may investigate whether certain cues are more specific

or effective in triggering the recall of particular types of memories. For example, they

might examine whether context-dependent cues are more effective than general cues.

5. Individual Differences: The experiment might also explore how factors such as age,

cognitive ability, or neurological conditions influence the effectiveness of cues on

memory recall. This can provide insights into individual differences in memory

processes.

Overall, the goals of cueing on recall memory experiments are to deepen our understanding

of how memory works and to identify strategies that can improve memory recall in various

contexts.

Reliability

The generate-recognize theory, proposed by Jacoby and Hollingshead (1990), consists

of two processes: generation of candidate responses and recognition of generated items. The

model is tested using a paradigm consisting of three independent test conditions following a

study experience. The model assumes that recall should never exceed studied item production

in the generation condition, and recall should either equal or exceed old item production in

the generate-recognize condition.

Predictions about the effects of distinctive processing on performance in the three test

conditions are also made. The study assumes that both study conditions foster encoding of

categorical information, and study-task manipulation will have no effect on indices of

generation. Measures of recognition are expected to be higher following distinctive

processing than following category judgment. This suggests that the advantage of distinctive

processing over processing of similarity lies in the recognition of generated items.

Method:
 9

300 undergraduate volunteers were randomly assigned to one of six conditions, with

half performing pleasantness ratings and half category judgments at study. The design was a

2 (study task) × 3 (test type) between-subject design.

Validity

Thirty-six Mount Allison University students registered in an Introductory

Psychology course participated in this experiment in exchange for partial course credit. The

ages of participants ranged from 17 to 24, with a mean age of 18.91 (SD = 1.48). Twenty-

seven participants identified as female and nine identified as males; all reported normal or

corrected to normal vision and hearing. The total testing time for each participant was

approximately one hour. Seven additional participants participated in pilot testing for the

stimulus sets, and data from one additional participant were excluded, as they were unable to

complete the task in the time allotted. The research protocol for this project was approved by

the Research Ethics Board of Mount Allison University on November 8, 2016 (Project Code

2016-051). Future research should also include a manipulation of number of cues specifically

at encoding and/or retrieval phases in order to disambiguate the stage at which the observed

effect is occurring. It is important to note that participants in this study were recruited from

undergraduate psychology classes at a university in Canada, which limits the generalizability

of the results. It did, however, find a very strong effect of number of cues, indicating that the

use of three memory cues rather than one is much more effective for memory recall. It is also

demonstrated the usefulness of self-reference memory, as it led to almost perfect accuracy

scores.
 10

Material Required

1. Two lists of words of thirty words each, where -

a. The words in list A are selected randomly

b. The words in list B are selected in such a way that they fall into five categories with six

words in each category.

2. Plain response sheet for recall of list A.

3. Response sheet with the names of five categories printed on them for recall of list B.

4. Stop clock.

Case History (Demographic Details)

• Name- S.V.V.

• Age- 18 years old

• Residence- Pimple Saudagar, Pune

• Marital Status- Unmarried

• Education- First Year, B.Sc. Psychology (Hons.)

• Occupation- Unemployed

• Languages known- English, Hindi, Telugu

 11

Administration

Procedure:

To ensure participant comfort, rapport was established, and the researcher introduced

themselves, including their name and department. The participant received a briefing on the

test and provided informed consent, which guaranteed the confidentiality of their information

as permitted by law. They were informed that their data would be coded with a unique

identifier, and personal details would be stored separately from the study data.

The participant was assured of the confidentiality of their identity, and that any

published data or results would be anonymized to protect their privacy. They were informed

that participation was voluntary, with the freedom to withdraw at any time without

consequences, and that their data would remain confidential even if they withdrew before the

study's completion.

They were also informed they could contact the researcher for their results. After

understanding their rights, the participant signed the consent form. Subsequently, the

participant was dictated the 'word list A' which is in a distributed fashion, with 2-3 seconds

intervals between each word. They were then provided with 'response sheet A' (Series 1),

where they were instructed to write the words they remembered within three minutes. After

completing task, A, there was a two-minute interval during which the researcher took the

participant's demographic details. Following this, the participant was dictated 'word list B'

and instructed to write the recalled words on 'response sheet B' (Series 2) within three

minutes. Upon completion of the test, the participant was thanked for their participation.

Scoring:

The Memory Recall experiment aims to assess cued recall. Here’s how scoring is

performed:
 12

1. Individual Scoring:
o Calculate the difference between the words recalled from both lists (Response
Sheet B and Sheet A).
o The total number of words recalled is given by:
Total words recalled = Response Sheet B – Sheet A.
2. Group Scoring:
o List the scores of the group in tabular form.
o To calculate the mean score, sum up the total number of words recalled and
then divide it by the number of group members.

Mean = total no. of words recalled / No. of group members

Results:

1. Individual Scores-

Correct Words Correct Words

Recalled in Recalled in Total words recalled
Results Response Sheet Response Sheet (Response Sheet B –
A B Sheet A)
(out of 30 words) (out of 30 words)

Scores 20 25 25-20= 5

2. Group Scores

Correct Words Recalled Correct Words Recalled in Net Score of Total words recalled
Sr. Group
in Response Sheet A Response Sheet B
No. Members
(out of 30 words) (out of 30 words) (Response Sheet B – Response Sheet A)
1. P.W 20 18 2
2. S.G.V 20 25 5
3. A.M 13 23 10
4. S.V.V 14 22 8
5. A.D 18 19 1
6. A.S 14 21 7
7. K.L 18 27 9
8. M.S 18 14 4
9. R.D 17 20 3
10. R.P 19 21 2
11. T.M 10 20 10
12. T.V.C 20 23 3
Total no. of words recalled 64
 13

∑(Net score of total no. of words recalled)

Mean =
No. of Group Members

64
Mean =
12

Mean = 5.333333

This mean score represents the average memory recall performance of the entire group.

Interpretation:

The individual scores show that response in B sheet has greater items(5 more items)

compared to response sheet A, so we can interpret that the participant recalled better in cued

recall rather than free recall. From the mean score above we can see that the recall

performance of the group is average. Comparing the scores between cued recall (response

sheet B) and free recall (response sheet A) of all group members, most group members were

able to recall better when cues were present more than that when they cues were not present

in list A.

Discussion:

From the purpose of the experiment, we were supposed to see the effects of cues on

recall. Hence the participants were told to recall without cues that is, free recall, before

moving on to recalling with cues that is, cued recall. The type of cued recall used in this

experiment was category cues in which different columns with different categories like fruits,

metals, flowers etc. were given and while recalling the participants can categorise the words

in their respective columns. The results of this experiment showed that using cues is highly

effective in recalling. It improves recall by activating certain memory networks making it

easier to recall each item within the category. This method of retrieval is more advantageous

with small number of items. With more items, recalling can be overwhelming to a certain

degree due to possible blocking of other items. These cues are certainly helpful to be used as

mnemonics for studying strategies such as the periodic table. When we are using category
 14

cues, broader categories such as fruits is more effective than narrower categories such as

seasonal fruits. This can create confusion due to vague distinctiveness of the items in

narrower categories. It is also observed that few of the participants got higher score in free

recall. This might be because their learning style is different and using category cues is more

difficult for them to recall certain items compared to free recall. Time also plays a significant

role in the retrieval of the items. The items are more effectively recalled when only short

periods of time have passed and it will be very difficult to do so after a long period of time

had passed. In essence, category cues are efficient for smaller and broader categories and

might interfere with larger and narrower categories.

Introspective report:

The participant could form mental images of the words when the words were spoken

aloud. She created a small story in her mind using the words during the free recall part of the

test which helped in retaining her memory when she wrote it down. During cued recall, when

the words were being said she felt a bit distracted due to the disturbances and noise in the

environment we were seated in, which affected her visualization of the words a bit. Although,

there was no visualizing of words, she could easily recall and write down a greater number of

words in the second part of the test. Overall, she felt like she could've done better if there

were less disturbances around.

Conclusion:

Cues are very helpful in triggering our memory networks making it easier to access

and retrieve information we want. Strong cues for small information are more effective than

weak cues for large ones. The cues that were done in this experiment, are better recalled

when only short period of time has passed. In conclusion, cued recall is an effective way of

retrieving information more so than free recall which is proved by the individual and group

scores shown in the results.

 15

References

Zimbardo, P. G., & Gerrig, R. J. (2004). Psychology and Life. Pearson Education.

Tulving, E., & Watkins, M. J. (1973). Continuity between recall and recognition. The
American Journal of Psychology, 86(4), 739. https://doi.org/10.2307/1422081

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225741387_Retrieval_in_cued_recall

Learning Network - LN - Western University. https://www.gbvlearningnetwork.ca/about-

us/Linda
Baker.html#:~:text=Dr.%20Linda%20Baker%20is%20a%20Psychologist%2C%20Assistant
%20Professor,led%20the%20Learning%20Network%20and%

https://www.scribd.com/document/503159062/1-Effect-of-Cueing-on-Recall
/
Meenu S Babu 1937433. (n.d.). 1 effect of cueing on recall. Scribd.
https://www.scribd.com/document/503159062/1-Effect-of-Cueing-on-Recall

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4757519/
/
Category cued recall evokes a generate-recognize retrieval process. (n.d.). PubMed Central
(PMC). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4757519/

Hilary C. Pearson, & Jonathan M. P. Wilbiks. (2021, March 19). Effects of audiovisual
memory cues on working memory recall. PubMed Central (PMC).
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8005969/