Cited by 1,696Memory Processes and InfluencesNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Search of associative memory

Raaijmakers, Jeroen G., Shiffrin, Richard M.·1981·Psychological Review

Abstract

Describes search of associative memory (SAM), a general theory of retrieval from long-term memory that combines features of associative network models and random search models. It posits cue-dependent probabilistic sampling and recovery from an associative network, but the network is specified as a retrieval structure rather than a storage structure. A quantitative computer simulation of SAM was developed and applied to the part-list cuing paradigm. When free recall of a list of words was cued by a random subset of words from that list, the probability of recalling one of the remaining words was less than if no cues were provided at all. SAM predicted this effect in all its variations by making extensive use of interword associations in retrieval, a process that previous theorizing has dismissed. (55 ref)

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0033-295x.88.2.93

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Models of free recall such as Search of Associative Memory and SIMPLE use the previously recalled word to cue the next word, and have been productively used to account for the dependencies seen when people attempt to recall a list of words.

    “Models of free recall such as Search of Associative Memory [95] and SIMPLE [96] use the previously recalled word to cue the next word, and has been productively used to account for the dependencies seen when people attempt to recall a list of words.”

    From Bayesian Brains without Probabilities (2016) · cites this paper as [95]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Raaijmakers, J. G., & Shiffrin, R. M.
Affiliations
Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
Venue
Psychological Review
Published
1981-03
Volume
88
Issue
2
Pages
93-134
ISSN
  • 0033-295X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1471
OpenAlex
W1982914430
Cited by
1,696
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 55 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 50 · 2018: 45 · 2017: 52 · 2016: 54 · 2015: 63 · 2014: 72 · 2013: 73 · 2012: 69
FWCI
23.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Review (publishedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
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
long-term memory retrieval, probability sampling, free recall

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