Causal coherence and memory for events in narratives
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Causally connected events have stronger associations at encoding.
“In turn, causally connected events have stronger associations at encoding (Black & Bern, 1981).”
From Stories in Action. (2022) · cites this paper as Black & Bern, 1981
In Black & Bern (1981), recall was better when two sentences were causally related.
“In both experiments, recall was better when the two sentences were causally related.”
From Stories in Action. (2022) · cites this paper as Black & Bern, 1981
Schemas facilitate retrieval.
“This also facilitates retrieval (Black & Bern, 1981).”
From Stories in Action. (2022) · cites this paper as Black & Bern, 1981
In free response, participants were more likely to recall two causally related sentences as one unit.
“In free response, participants were more likely to recall two causally related sentences as one unit (as measured by conjunctions or summary statements).”
From Stories in Action. (2022) · cites this paper as Black & Bern, 1981
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Dimensions of Consumer Expertise
Alba, J. W., & Hutchinson, J. W. (1987) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209080 · Cited by 4,375 · see citing works
Examining the effects of classroom discussion on students’ comprehension of text: A meta-analysis.
Murphy, P. K., Wilkinson, I. A. G., Soter, A. O., Hennessey, M. N., & Alexander, J. F. (2009) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0015576 · Cited by 566 · see citing works
Walsh, J., Vaida, N., Coman, A., & Fiske, S. T. (2022) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/15291006231161337 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
“To illustrate, in one experiment, participants read narratives, then saw sentences from those narratives and tried to recall the sentences that came immediately after (Black & Bern, 1981).”
BackgroundMethodInfluential
- Authors
- Black, J. B., & Bern, H.
- Affiliations
- Yale University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Black, John B.
- Venue
- Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1981-06
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 267-275
- ISSN
- 0022-5371 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2038150796
- Cited by
- 170
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 4.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Identity, Memory, and Therapy
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Keywords
- causal coherence, narrative memory, event memory, story recall, cued recall, free recall, sentence combination, causal relationship
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
