Cited by 65Memory Processes and InfluencesCognitive Functions and MemoryMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Building up and wearing down episodic memory: mnemonic discrimination and relational binding

Open access
Ngo, Chi T., Lin, Ying, Newcombe, Nora S., Olson, Ingrid R.·2019·Journal of Experimental Psychology General

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Our capacity to form and retrieve episodic memories improves over childhood but declines in old age. Understanding these changes requires decomposing episodic memory into its components. Two such components are (a) mnemonic discrimination of similar people, objects, and contexts, and (b) relational binding of these elements. We designed novel memory tasks to assess these component processes using animations that are appropriate across the life span (ages 4-80 in our sample). In Experiment 1, we assessed mnemonic discrimination of objects as well as relational binding, in a common task format. Both components follow an inverted U-shaped curve across age but were positively correlated only in the aging group. In Experiment 2, we examined mnemonic discrimination of context and its effect on relational binding. Relational memory in low-similarity contexts showed robust gains between the ages of 4 and 6, whereas 6-year-olds performed similarly to adults. In contrast, relational memory in high-similarity contexts showed more protracted development, with 4- and 6-year-olds both performing worse than young adults and not differing from each other. Relational memory in both context conditions declined in aging. This multiprocess approach provides important theoretical insights into life span changes in episodic memory. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

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/xge0000583

Cites

75 of 75 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Previous studies have consistently reported age-related improvements in context binding, or relational binding in general, throughout early and middle childhood.

    “Previous studies have consistently reported age-related improvements in context binding—or relational binding in general—throughout early and middle childhood 12,17,22,23.”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Craik FIM, & McDowd JM (1987). Age differences in recall and cognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13(3), 474– 479.
  2. Lee JK, Johnson EG, Ghetti S (2017) Hippocampal Development: Structure, Function and Implications In: Hannula D, Duff M (eds) The Hippocampus from Cells to Systems. Springer, Cham.
  3. Olson IR, & Newcombe NS (2014). Binding together the elements of episodes: Relational memory and the developmental trajectory of the hippocampus The Wiley Handbook and the Development of Children’s Memory, Volume I/II Patricia J. Bauer and Robyn Fivush.
  4. Serres L (2001). Morphological changes of the human hippocampal formation from midgestation to early childhood In Nelson CA & Luciania M (Eds.), Handhook of Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience (pp. 45– 58). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ngo, C. T., Lin, Y., Newcombe, N. S., & Olson, I. R.
Affiliations
University of Rochester (US)
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology General
Published
2019-09
Volume
148
Issue
9
Pages
1463-1479
ISSN
  • 0096-3445 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2222
OpenAlex
W2925250592
Cited by
65
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1
FWCI
3.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Psychology General (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (F31HD090872)
  • National Science Foundation (SBE-1041707)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (RO1 MH091113)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
episodic memory, mnemonic discrimination, relational binding, relational memory, memory development, aging, object recognition, contextual memory, older adults
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Child, Child, Preschool, Female, Humans, Longevity, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Comprehension, Young Adult, Memory, Episodic

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