Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34710897›Full record

ArticleNeural computation2021

Asymmetric Weights and Retrieval Practice in an Autoassociative Neural Network Model of Paired-Associate Learning.

Sneha Aenugu, David E Huber

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neural computation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. No evidence of a visual testing effect for novel, meaningless objects.Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Sneha AenuguDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, U.S.A. saenugu@umass.edu.
David E HuberDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, U.S.A. dehuber@umass.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rizzuto and Kahana (2001) applied an autoassociative Hopfield network to a paired-associate word learning experiment in which (1) participants studied word pairs (e.g., ABSENCE-HOLLOW), (2) were tested in one direction (ABSENCE-?) on a first test, and (3) were tested in the same direction again or in the reverse direction (?-HOLLOW) on a second test. The model contained a correlation parameter to capture the dependence between forward versus backward learning between the two words of a word pair, revealing correlation values close to 1.0 for all participants, consistent with neural network models that use the same weight for communication in both directions between nodes. We addressed several limitations of the model simulations and proposed two new models incorporating retrieval practice learning (e.g., the effect of the first test on the second) that fit the accuracy data more effectively, revealing substantially lower correlation values (average of .45 across participants, with zero correlation for some participants). In addition, we analyzed recall latencies, finding that second test recall was faster in the same direction after a correct first test. Only a model with stochastic retrieval practice learning predicted this effect. In conclusion, recall accuracy and recall latency suggest asymmetric learning, particularly in light of retrieval practice effects.

Indexed as

Paired-Associate LearningVerbal LearningHumansLearningMental RecallNeural Networks, Computer

Identifiers

PMID34710897
PMCPMC8662717

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.