Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 432

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Depth of processing pictures of faces and recognition memory.

Bower, Gordon H., Karlin, Martin B.·1974·Journal of Experimental Psychology

Abstract

These studies ask whether S remembers a picture better the greater the "depth of processing " he allots to it. Depth of processing pictures of faces was varied according to judgments of sex ("superficial") or judgments of likableness or honesty of the person pictured. Performance on a later recognition memory test was high for pictures judged for likableness or honesty, and low for pictures judged for sex. This ordering held as'true for intentional learners as for incidental learners. A final experiment showed that face recognition memory was not materially affected by a context manipulation: an old test picture was remembered at a level determined by its original depth of processing and independently of how it was tested—either alone, along side an old picture it had been studied with, or with a new picture. In a recent paper, Craik and Lockhart (1972) argued that "depth of processing" of stimulus material is a direct determinant of how well that material will be remem-bered. The underlying assumption in their approach is that a stimulus is processed through a series of stages with different kinds of information being extracted from or triggered off by the stimulus at suc-cessive stages. Sensory features of the stimulus are presumably extracted first, whereas associative information (such as the name or meaning of a grapheme) be-comes available later. In support of their depth of processing hypothesis, Craik and Lockhart review studies showing higher incidental learning for words which 5s had processed for meaning than for items proc-essed for physical attributes. For instance, Hyde and Jenkins (1969) oriented 5s to answer different questions with respect to a word, either counting the number of letters in it or the number of es, or rating it for pleasantness. Those 5s who did the pleasantness judgments recalled the words later much better than did the other 5s. Similarly, Johnston and Jenkins (1971) showed that 5s required to think

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/h0037190

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 432

Metadata

Authors
Bower, G. H., & Karlin, M. B.
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology
Published
1974-10
Volume
103
Issue
4
Pages
751-757
ISSN
0022-1015 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2129091132
Cited by
432
References
1
FWCI
4.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Depth of processing pictures of faces and recognition memory. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/h0037190
The paper
Bower, G. H., & Karlin, M. B. (1974). Depth of processing pictures of faces and recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037190

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.