title: Successful cuing of gender source memory does not improve location source memory.
abstract: In three experiments we explored cross-dimensional cuing effects in a multidimensional source encoding and retrieval paradigm. We employed a bias-controlled experimental method of source cuing at retrieval (Starns & Hicks, 2013) in an attempt to improve retrieval of location information indirectly by cuing gender information. Encoded words were situated on the left or right side of a computer monitor and associated with either a male or a female face. When multiple faces were used across the set of encoded words, reinstating the correct face at retrieval alongside an incorrect, opposite-gender face cue improved male/female source decisions for test words. However, this powerful test cue did not improve memory for the encoded location of the words, suggesting that within-dimension cuing does not produce cross-dimensional cuing. This null outcome was found when gender decisions were required (Experiments 1A and 2) or not required (Experiment 1B) prior to location decisions. Nor was cross-dimension cuing found when subjects were told to expect a source test of both gender and location information at retrieval (Experiment 2). Our findings reinforce prior work demonstrating that multiple context dimensions can be bound to item information without any direct binding between the contexts.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, 70803-5501, USA. jhicks@lsu.edu.
authors.forename: Jason L
authors.initials: JL
authors.lastname: Hicks
authors.affiliation: University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, 01003, MA, USA.
authors.forename: Jeffrey J
authors.initials: JJ
authors.lastname: Starns
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D003463:Cues; D000066499:Facial Recognition / Q000502:physiology*; D006801:Humans; D011939:Mental Recall / Q000502:physiology*; D012737:Sex Factors; D065852:Spatial Memory / Q000502:physiology*; D055815:Young Adult
keywords: Context effects; Cuing; Recognition; Source memory; Stochastic dependence
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 2005 Jan;33(1):151-70
references.pmid: 15915801
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2008 Jan;34(1):32-49
references.pmid: 18194053
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2002 Jan;28(1):116-37
references.pmid: 11827074
references.citation: J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003 Dec;85(6):1107-20
references.pmid: 14674817
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Gen. 2013 Nov;142(4):1370-83
references.pmid: 23915127
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 2013 Oct;41(7):953-66
references.pmid: 23666645
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2008 Apr;15(2):309-14
references.pmid: 18488645
references.citation: Psychol Bull. 1993 Jul;114(1):3-28
references.pmid: 8346328
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Gen. 1988 Mar;117(1):34-50
references.pmid: 2966230
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2005 Nov;31(6):1213-20
references.pmid: 16393041
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2001 Apr;108(2):452-78
references.pmid: 11381837
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2000 Jul;26(4):1023-44
references.pmid: 10946376
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2009 Apr;16(2):225-37
references.pmid: 19293088
references.citation: Conscious Cogn. 2007 Mar;16(1):189-210
references.pmid: 16725348
references.citation: Nat Commun. 2015 Jul 02;6:7462
references.pmid: 26136141
references.citation: Exp Psychol. 2014;61(5):402-15
references.pmid: 24836123
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2007 Mar;33(2):443-50
references.pmid: 17352624
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 1994 Sep;22(5):584-90
references.pmid: 7968554
references.citation: Curr Biol. 2014 May 5;24(9):988-92
references.pmid: 24746796
references.citation: Behav Res Methods. 2007 May;39(2):175-91
references.pmid: 17695343
references.citation: Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2012;65(8):1484-501
references.pmid: 22493990