ArticleCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2021
Recallable but not recognizable: The influence of semantic priming in recall paradigms.
Article in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Synchronous Theta Networks Characterize Successful Memory Retrieval.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Unexpected Twists: Electrophysiological Correlates of Encoding and Retrieval of Events Eliciting Prediction Error.Psychophysiology · 2025Article
- Context familiarity is a third kind of episodic memory distinct from item familiarity and recollection.iScience · 2024Article
- An ERP measure of non-conscious memory reveals dissociable implicit processes in human recognition using an open-source automated analytic pipeline.Psychophysiology · 2023Article
- The Effect of Prior Knowledge of Color on Behavioral Responses and Event-Related Potentials During Go/No-go Task.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
When people can successfully recall a studied word, they should be able to recognize it as having been studied. In cued-recall paradigms, however, participants sometimes correctly recall words in the presence of strong semantic cues but then fail to recognize those words as actually having been studied. Although the conditions necessary to produce this unusual effect are known, the underlying neural correlates have not been investigated. Across five experiments, involving both behavioral and electrophysiological methods (EEG), we investigated the cognitive and neural processes that underlie recognition failures. Experiments 1 and 2 showed behaviorally that assuming that recalled items can be recognized in cued-recall paradigms is a flawed assumption, because recognition failures occur in the presence of cues, regardless of whether those failures are measured. With event-related potentials (ERPs), Experiments 3 and 4 revealed that successfully recalled words that are recognized are driven by recollection at recall and then by a combination of recollection and familiarity at ensuing recognition. In contrast, recognition failures did not show that memory signature and may instead be driven by semantic priming at recall and followed at recognition stages by negative-going ERP effects consistent with implicit processes, such as repetition fluency. These results demonstrate that recall - long-characterized as predominantly reflecting recollection-based processing in episodic memory - may at times also be served by a confluence of implicit cognitive processes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.