title: More on recognition and recall in amnesics.
abstract: Hirst et al. (1986) reported that amnesic forced-choice recognition was relatively preserved when compared with amnesic recall. They equated normal recognition and amnesic recognition by extending exposure time for the amnesics and then comparing amnesic recall and normal recall. Amnesic recall was worse than normal recall, despite equated recognition. We conducted two experiments to extend that result. Experiment 1 established that the findings of Hirst et al. are not paradigm specific and hold when amnesic recognition and normal recognition are equated by increasing the retention interval for normals. In Experiment 2 we further established the generality of the result by examining yes-no recognition. Findings further specify the selective nature of the direct memory deficit in amnesics.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, Graduate Faculty of the New School of Social Research, New York, New York 10003.
authors.forename: W
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Hirst
authors.forename: M K
authors.initials: MK
authors.lastname: Johnson
authors.forename: E A
authors.initials: EA
authors.lastname: Phelps
authors.forename: B T
authors.initials: BT
authors.lastname: Volpe
mesh_terms: D000647:Amnesia / Q000523:psychology*; D001288:Attention; D001925:Brain Damage, Chronic / Q000523:psychology; D006801:Humans; D008568:Memory; D011939:Mental Recall; D008875:Middle Aged; D019965:Neurocognitive Disorders / Q000523:psychology; D009483:Neuropsychological Tests; D012153:Retention, Psychology; D014706:Verbal Learning