Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35665954›Full record

ArticleCognitive science2022

Modeling the Remote Associates Test as Retrievals from Semantic Memory.

Jule Schatz, Steven J Jones, John E Laird

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Jule SchatzComputer Science and Engineering Division of the Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Department, University of Michigan.
Steven J JonesComputer Science and Engineering Division of the Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Department, University of Michigan.
John E LairdComputer Science and Engineering Division of the Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Department, University of Michigan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Remote Associates Test (RAT) is a word association retrieval task that consists of a series of problems, each with three seemingly unrelated prompt words. The subject is asked to produce a single word that is related to all three prompt words. In this paper, we provide support for a theory in which the RAT assesses a person's ability to retrieve relevant word associations from long-term memory. We present a computational model of humans solving the RAT and investigate how prior knowledge and memory retrieval mechanisms influence the model's ability to match human behavior. We expand prior modeling attempts by investigating multiple large knowledge bases and by creating a cognitive process model that uses long-term memory spreading activation retrieval processes inspired by ACT-R and implemented in Soar. We evaluate multiple model variants for their ability to model human problem difficulty, including the incorporation of noise and base-level activation into memory retrieval. We conclude that the main factors affecting human difficulty are the existence of associations between prompt words and solutions, the relative strengths and directions of those associations compared to associations to other words, and the ability to perform multiple retrievals.

Indexed as

MemorySemanticsHumansKnowledgeMemory, Long-TermCognitive architectureCognitive modelingRemote Associates TestSemantic memory

Identifiers

PMID35665954
PMCPMC9286825

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.