Use of Deep Encoding Strategies Correlates with Development of Associative Memory Amanda Hardwick, Ana M. Daugherty, William Lacey, Raphael Serota, Jonathan Stoltman, Noa Ofen
Use of Deep Encoding Strategies Correlates with Development of Associative Memory
Amanda Hardwick, Ana M. Daugherty, William Lacey, Raphael Serota, Jonathan Stoltman, Noa Ofen
Institute of Gerontology, Department of Psychology, Department of Pediatrics School of Medicine, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan
Recognition accuracy was measured as d’ (3):
d’ = z-1(correct recognition rate) – z-1(false alarm rate)
General linear models measured differences in d’ by age (mean centered), sex, and strategy factor composite scores or reported strategy use (bootstrapped 5000 draws, 100% of the sample).
Associative Recognition Correlated with Belief in Deep Strategies
Factor Analysis: Belief in Effective Encoding Strategies
Children and adults had a similar pattern of rating belief in effectiveness of strategies.
Although, adults rated “sentence creation” higher than children: t(27) = -3.27, p = 0.02, 95% CI: -4.16/-0.99.
Using a Deep Encoding Strategy Correlated with Better Associative Recognition during Development
Participants: Age 8-25 years; all healthy and right-handed.
All participants were screened for psychiatric and neurological disease, head trauma, learning
disorders, and premature birth.
Memory for associative word-pair recognition overall improved with age: d’-pair,
β = 0.46, p = 0.003; 95% CI: 0.04/0.15).
Children Used Deep Encoding Strategies Less Often
Word-Pair Associative Memory Task
When indicating what strategies were used, children (55%) were less likely than adults (76%) to report using a deep strategy (χ2 = 5.16, p = 0.02).
Counterbalanced list order
Count down by
3’s from 792
Distraction Task for 1 min.
If Response is “Yes”
Correct False Recognition
Across all participants, those who used a deep strategy had better associative recognition than those who had used a shallow strategy: t(14) = 2.18, p = 0.046; 95% CI: 0.02/1.68
Studied vs. New
16 forced-choice trials;
Counterbalanced test order
Intact vs. Recombined
Strategy Questionnaire: Meta-Memory Belief Ratings and Strategy Use
1 Ofen, N. (2012). The development of neural correlates for memory formation. Neurosci Behav Rev,
2 Bender, AR, Raz, N. (2012). Age-related differences in recognition memory for items and associations:
Contribution of individual differences in working memory and metamemory. Psyhol Aging, 27(3),
3 Stainslaw, H, Todorov, N. (1999). Calculation of signal detection theory measures. Behav Res Meth,
4 Shing, YL, Werkle-Bergner, M, Li, S, Lindenberger, U. (2008). Associative and strategic components of
episodic memory: A life-span dissociation. J Exp Psychol Gen, 137(3), 495-513.
Special thanks to the OfenLab research team: Ryan Abbott, Raagini Suresh, Komal
Patel, Tanvee Jain, Ishan Patel, Sunpreet Singh, Nikhil Adapa.
Funding was provided by the Institute of Gerontology, Department of Pediatrics, OVPR Wayne State University.