"Schema Abstraction" in a Multiple-Trace Memory Model

By D. L. Hintzman. 1986

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Generalization Through the Recurrent Interaction of Episodic Memories (2012, methodology): “As noted previously, traditional models of similarity based generalization (Hintzman, 1986; Medin & Schaffer, 1978; Nosofsky, 1984; Shepard, 1987), typically lacking a capacity for recurrency, are unable to perform inference in the transitivity and related tasks.”
Rich memory and distributed phonology (2010, background): “…well-known phenomena of speech perception are quite incompatible with abstract, segmental representations but fit very well with a view of language storage that is concrete and detailed as proposed in exemplar models of memory (Hintzman, 1986; Goldinger, 1996; Pierrehumbert, 2001; Johnson, 2006).”
Semantic feature production norms for a large set of living and nonliving things (2005, background): “Hintzman, D. L. (1986). “Schema abstraction” in a multiple-trace memory model. Psychological Review, 93, 411-428. Jones, S. S., & Smith, L. B. (1993). The place of perception in children’s concepts.”
Bilingualism and the Emotional Intensity of Advertising Language (2009, background): “Episodic trace theories suggest that, in general, the activation intensity of an echo is a positive function of the number of relevant episodic traces stored in memory (Hintzman 1986).”
Concepts and categories: Memory, meaning, and metaphysics (2012, background): “For example, the mental representation of DAISY would include descriptions of specific daisies that an individual had encoded (e.g., Hintzman, 1986; Medin & Schaffer, 1978; Nosofsky, 1986).”
Nonintentional analogical inference in text comprehension (2007, result): “Resonance Models of Activation Our results are consistent with research that has examined the role of general memory processes in the generation of inferences and maintenance of coherence in text, largely focusing on “resonance” models of memory activation (e.g., Gillund & Shiffrin, 1984; Hintzman, ”
Associative asymmetry in probed recall of serial lists (2002, background): “Some memory models assume symmetric associative operations (Hintzman, 1986; Metcalfe, 1985; Metcalfe-Eich, 1982; Murdock, 1982, 1997), whereas others allow for separate weights on forward and backward associations (Gillund & Shiffrin,”
One Hundred Years of Forgetting : A Quantitative Description of Retention (1996, background): “Although sophisticated mathematical models of memory exist (e.g., Gillund & Shim-in, 1984; Hintzman, 1986; Murdock, 1982), they do not make strong predictions about the mathematical form of the retention function.”
Cognitive Regularities in Creative Activity (2000, background): “In noncreative tasks, information is retrieved from memory on the basis of its association with a particular encoding context or particular learning episode (Hintzman, 1986; Jacoby, Levy, & Steinbach, 1992; Kolers & Roediger, 1984; Tulving, 1962).”
Conversational Common Ground and Memory Processes in Language Production (2005, background): “Resonance is a fast, passive, and effort-free mechanism in which cues in working memory interact in parallel with information residing in long-term memory (akin to global-matching models of recognition memory; e.g., Gillund & Schiffrin, 1984; Hintzman, 1986, 1988; Ratcliff, 1978; see also Nelson, ”
Remembering and knowing in context (2003, methodology): “Following global models of recognition memory (e.g., Gillund & Shiffrin, 1984; Hintzman, 1986; Murdock, 1982) and the source-monitoring framework (Johnson, Hashtroudi, & Lindsay, 1993), Gruppuso et al. assumed that a studied item presented on a test list will evoke a subset of the multiple features…”
Content and process priming: A review ☆ (2014, unknown): “Several models specify the nature of these associations (e.g., Collins & Loftus, 1975; Higgins, Bargh, & Lombardi, 1985; Hintzman, 1986; Ratcliff & McKoon, 1988; Wyer & Carlston, 1979; Wyer & Srull, 1989).”
The nature of working memory capacity in sentence comprehension : Evidence against domain-specific working memory resources (2006, methodology): “To explain their results, Gordon et al. adopted the similarity-based interference framework (e.g., Gillund & Shiffrin, 1984; Hintzman, 1986 ).”