PDF (PhD Thesis Susan Chipchase) - Nottingham eTheses ...

paradigm was first introduced by Tulving (1985) to examine different states of
awareness which were thought to underlie memory retrieval. In this task
participants are asked to indicate the basis on which they judged a previously
studied item to be ‘old’. They have to distinguish between a ‘Remember’
response to indicate they are able to remember its prior occurrence and a
‘Know’ response to indicate they simply knew it was old by some other
criteria. These responses were proposed to reflect autonoetic and noetic
consciousness which were thought to respectively characterise episodic and
semantic memory systems (Tulving, 1985). Later work by Gardiner (1988) led
to the development of operational definitions of remembering and knowing and
a dissociation was reported between remember and know responses.
Manipulations of levels of processing were found to affect the proportion of
Remember responses but have no effect on Know responses (Gardiner, 1988).
Much of the research stemming from these two first studies further investigated
the extent to which Remember and Know responses can be dissociated by
different experimental variables (Dunn, 2004).
The interpretation of Remember/Know responses depends on whether a
single-process or dual-process model of recognition memory is assumed to be
more likely (Dunn, 2004). There is a great deal of controversy in the literature
over theories of recognition memory with different researchers arguing equally
strongly for the single-process model and others for the dual-process model of
recognition memory (for a review see Malmberg, 2008). The different
interpretations of results from the paradigm will now be briefly described.
Within the dual-process interpretation of the Remember/Know paradigm it is
assumed that Remember and Know responses reflect different forms of
101