Dataset

Investigating the effects of study time, study repetition, semantic and orthographic similarity, and category length on item recognition memory receiver operating characteristics

The University of Newcastle, Australia
Andrew Heathcote (Associated with)
Viewed: [[ro.stat.viewed]] Cited: [[ro.stat.cited]] Accessed: [[ro.stat.accessed]]
ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Adc&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2FANDS&rft_id=http://hdl.handle.net/1959.13/807092&rft.title=Investigating the effects of study time, study repetition, semantic and orthographic similarity, and category length on item recognition memory receiver operating characteristics&rft.identifier=http://hdl.handle.net/1959.13/807092&rft.publisher=The University of Newcastle, Australia&rft.description=All Experiments First year Psychology students aged 18-25 participated in exchange for course credit. A PC presented stimuli and recorded responses. Participants simultaneously indicated whether a test word was new or old and their confidence on a 6-point scale. Confidence ratings were obtained using the z, x, c, ., ., and / keys, indicating Sure New, Probably New, Possibly New, Possibly Old, Probably Old, and Sure Old, respectively. During testing, the words Sure, Probably, Possibly, Possibly, Probably, and Sure were arrayed across the bottom of the screen with the words New and Old above Probably on the left and right, respectively. Word sets were equated on number of letters and average log-word-frequency. All stimuli are provided in the appendices of the publication output. Experiment 1 Participants: 32 participants each were randomly allocated to the massed study and 32 to the spaced study conditions. The experiment lasted one hour. Experiment 1 was designed to examine the effect of semantic similarity and study time, weak (3 s/pair) versus strong (6 s/pair), as within-subject variables. Study words were presented in pairs and participants instructed to create associations between pair members in order to focus study on the currently presented pair. Spaced versus massed presentation of strong items was a between-subjects variable. Stimuli: Similar stimuli were drawn from sets of 24 words from 18 categories. The set of dissimilar stimuli consisted of 776 words selected so that they did not come from any of the categories used for similar words. Forty of the dissimilar words were used for practice and the remaining 736 for testing. Experiment 2 Participants: 24 participants were randomly allocated to the massed and 34 to the spaced study conditions. The experiment lasted one hour. The experimental procedure was identical to that of Experiment 1, except for one detail of study-test list construction. The 18 experimental lists for each participant were drawn randomly without replacement from the pool of 36 word sets. Each study-test list was constructed by random selection from the 24 similar and 32 dissimilar words in each set, rather than dissimilar words being drawn from a common pool as in Experiment 1. The stimuli consisted of 36 sets of 56 words each, 24 words having high mutual orthographic similarity and 32 words having low mutual similarity, and low similarity to the 24 highly similar words. Orthographic similarity was measured by “overlap”: the percentage of identical letters in the same positions. The similarity of each word to all other words in its list was calculated by the overlap measure and averaged for each set of words. Pairs of similar words had an average 58.5% overlap, pairs of dissimilar words 2.9% overlap, and pairs of similar and dissimilar words 0.7% overlap. Experiment 3 Participants: 34 first year psychology students aged 18-25 participated in exchange for course credit. Testing was over two 1hour sessions held on different and usually successive days. The stimuli consisted of 36 sets of 56 words each, 24 words having high mutual orthographic similarity and 32 words having low mutual similarity, and low similarity to the 24 highly similar words. Words in each set had the same number of letters. Orthographic similarity was measured by “overlap”: the percentage of identical letters in the same positions. The similarity of each word to all other words in its list was calculated by the overlap measure and averaged for each set of words. Pairs of similar words had an average 58.5% overlap, pairs of dissimilar words 2.9% overlap, and pairs of similar and dissimilar words 0.7% overlap. In addition, 12 pure dissimilar word sets were also used, 3 with five-letter words, 4 with six-letter words, 3 with seven-letter words, and 2 with eight-letter words. The pure dissimilar sets consisted of 40 words. Pairs of words from the pure dissimilar sets had an average 4.7% overlap.Four experiments were conducted to investigate the effects of study time, study repetition, semantic and orthographic similarity, and category length on item recognition memory receiver operating characteristics (ROCs). The collection contains 5 square tab-delimited text files in .txt format, containing individual participant response frequencies for Experiments 1, 2 and 3 and a readme text file.&rft.creator=Anonymous&rft.date=2011&rft.relation=http://hdl.handle.net/1959.13/27223&rft_subject=Dual Process Signal Detection&rft_subject=Signal Detection Theory&rft_subject=Unequal Variance Signal Detection&rft_subject=Psychology&rft_subject=Psychology and Cognitive Sciences&rft_subject=Receiver Operating Characteristics&rft_subject=Recognition Memory&rft_subject=Orthography&rft_subject=Stimulus Parameters&rft_subject=Mathematical Modelling&rft_subject=Recognition (Learning)&rft_subject=Word Frequency&rft_subject=Stimulus Similarity&rft_subject=Semantics&rft.type=dataset&rft.language=English Go to Data Provider

Access:

Other view details

Access to this dataset is supplied on condition that the chief investigator associated with this dataset is credited in any publications that use the data.

Contact Information

University of Newcastle, University Drive, Callaghan NSW 2308

Brief description

Four experiments were conducted to investigate the effects of study time, study repetition, semantic and orthographic similarity, and category length on item recognition memory receiver operating characteristics (ROCs). The collection contains 5 square tab-delimited text files in .txt format, containing individual participant response frequencies for Experiments 1, 2 and 3 and a readme text file.

Full description

All Experiments First year Psychology students aged 18-25 participated in exchange for course credit. A PC presented stimuli and recorded responses. Participants simultaneously indicated whether a test word was new or old and their confidence on a 6-point scale. Confidence ratings were obtained using the z, x, c, ., ., and / keys, indicating Sure New, Probably New, Possibly New, Possibly Old, Probably Old, and Sure Old, respectively. During testing, the words Sure, Probably, Possibly, Possibly, Probably, and Sure were arrayed across the bottom of the screen with the words New and Old above Probably on the left and right, respectively. Word sets were equated on number of letters and average log-word-frequency. All stimuli are provided in the appendices of the publication output. Experiment 1 Participants: 32 participants each were randomly allocated to the massed study and 32 to the spaced study conditions. The experiment lasted one hour. Experiment 1 was designed to examine the effect of semantic similarity and study time, weak (3 s/pair) versus strong (6 s/pair), as within-subject variables. Study words were presented in pairs and participants instructed to create associations between pair members in order to focus study on the currently presented pair. Spaced versus massed presentation of strong items was a between-subjects variable. Stimuli: Similar stimuli were drawn from sets of 24 words from 18 categories. The set of dissimilar stimuli consisted of 776 words selected so that they did not come from any of the categories used for similar words. Forty of the dissimilar words were used for practice and the remaining 736 for testing. Experiment 2 Participants: 24 participants were randomly allocated to the massed and 34 to the spaced study conditions. The experiment lasted one hour. The experimental procedure was identical to that of Experiment 1, except for one detail of study-test list construction. The 18 experimental lists for each participant were drawn randomly without replacement from the pool of 36 word sets. Each study-test list was constructed by random selection from the 24 similar and 32 dissimilar words in each set, rather than dissimilar words being drawn from a common pool as in Experiment 1. The stimuli consisted of 36 sets of 56 words each, 24 words having high mutual orthographic similarity and 32 words having low mutual similarity, and low similarity to the 24 highly similar words. Orthographic similarity was measured by “overlap”: the percentage of identical letters in the same positions. The similarity of each word to all other words in its list was calculated by the overlap measure and averaged for each set of words. Pairs of similar words had an average 58.5% overlap, pairs of dissimilar words 2.9% overlap, and pairs of similar and dissimilar words 0.7% overlap. Experiment 3 Participants: 34 first year psychology students aged 18-25 participated in exchange for course credit. Testing was over two 1hour sessions held on different and usually successive days. The stimuli consisted of 36 sets of 56 words each, 24 words having high mutual orthographic similarity and 32 words having low mutual similarity, and low similarity to the 24 highly similar words. Words in each set had the same number of letters. Orthographic similarity was measured by “overlap”: the percentage of identical letters in the same positions. The similarity of each word to all other words in its list was calculated by the overlap measure and averaged for each set of words. Pairs of similar words had an average 58.5% overlap, pairs of dissimilar words 2.9% overlap, and pairs of similar and dissimilar words 0.7% overlap. In addition, 12 pure dissimilar word sets were also used, 3 with five-letter words, 4 with six-letter words, 3 with seven-letter words, and 2 with eight-letter words. The pure dissimilar sets consisted of 40 words. Pairs of words from the pure dissimilar sets had an average 4.7% overlap.

Notes

Datasets are available for Experiments 1, 2 and 3.

Data time period: 2003 to 12 2003