Cited by 249Memory Processes and InfluencesNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismMemory and Neural Mechanisms

When Does Semantic Similarity Help Episodic Retrieval?

Howard, Marc W, Kahana, Michael J·2002·Journal of Memory and Language

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/jmla.2001.2798

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Howard and Kahana showed that people tend to recall items semantically related to the item they just recalled.

    “Howard and Kahana (2002) showed that participants tend to recall items which are semantically related to the item just recalled.”

    From The benefit of generating errors during learning (2014) · cites this paper as Howard & Kahana, 2002

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Howard, M. W., & Kahana, M. J.
Affiliations
Brandeis University (US)
Venue
Journal of Memory and Language
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2002-01
Volume
46
Issue
1
Pages
85-98
ISSN
0749-596X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2081186730
Cited by
249
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 10
FWCI
2.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Memory and Language (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
free recall, semantic similarity, episodic memory retrieval, episodic memory, latent semantic analysis, temporal proximity, semantic proximity, recall order, memory organization, word lists

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review