The Isolation Effect in Free Recall and Recognition

Author(s): Gerrit van Dam, Joan Peeck, Michèle Brinkerink and Usmar Gorter
Source: The American Journal of Psychology, Vol. 87, No. 3 (Sep., 1974), pp. 497-504
Published by: University of Illinois Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1421391
Accessed: 13-11-2015 07:45 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1421391?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of Illinois Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The American Journal of
Psychology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 147.188.128.74 on Fri, 13 Nov 2015 07:45:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 The Isolation Effect in Free Recall and Recognition
Gerrit van Dam, Joan Peeck, Mich1le Brinkerink, and Usmar Gorter
Universityof Utrecht,the Netherlands
PsychologicalLaboratory,

The isolationeffect was studiedin an experimentwhich measured,in different

groups,either free recall or recognitionof a series of words, each series con-
taining one isolated item. An isolation effect was obtainedin free recall but
not in recognition.The resultsare discussedin terms of the retrievalmecha-
nismsoperatingin freerecall.

Since 1933, when von Restorff first reported systematic research on

the isolation effect, a continuous flow of publications has been devoted
to this phenomenon (for a review, see Wallace, 1965). A central and
yet unresolved problem in the interpretation of the effect is its locus in
the sequence learning/retention/retrieval. Originally, von Restorff sug-
gested processes like 'Bereichsbildung' on the trace level. Later, pro-
cesses taking place during initial learning were emphasized; for example,
Green (1956) thought the effect to be due to the pronounced 'surprise
value' of the isolated item. More recently, attempts have been made to
assess the importance of retrieval processes in the better retention of the
isolated item. One way of doing this is to compare the strength of the
isolation effect in recall versus recognition, as retrieval processes are gen-
erally more important in the former than in the latter. If the effect is
largely due to input processes going on during initial learning, then the
effect should be obtained in tests of both recall and recognition. If,
however, the effect is mostly determined by retrieval processes, then one
would expect the effect to be smaller or absent in tests of recognition.
Surprisingly,only very few studies on the isolation effect have used tests
of recognition. Most relevant to our purpose is a study by McLaughlin
(1968). Using a serial anticipation task, he found a 'vivid' (isolated)
item to be better retained than control items in tests of free recall if
learning consisted of two or three trials; however, no such effect was
found in tests of recognition that substituted for or followed the tests of
recall. McLaughlin used CVCs, presented on slides, as learning material;
vividness was produced by changing size (4 in. instead of 1.5 in.) and
shape (uppercase bold instead of lowercase 'pica') of the letters. In

497
American Journal of Psychology
1974, Vol. 87, No. 3, pp. 497-504

This content downloaded from 147.188.128.74 on Fri, 13 Nov 2015 07:45:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
498 VAN DAM, PEECK, BRINKERINK, AND GORTER

the tests of recognition, the subjects were presented a list of CVCs, all
typed in uppercase pica symbols. The CVCs to be recognized were
therefore all somewhat different in appearance from the ones originally
presented, which may have differentially affected the isolated item. It
seemed to us better to design the experiment in such a way that the items
to be recognized are themselves literal copies of the ones originally
presented--though in a different context. In the present experiment,
therefore, isolation was effected by manipulating the background of the
items: slides were used both for learning and for the test of recognition,
and the materials were common words instead of CVCs, to enable sub-
jects to achieve more semantic encoding. The words were presented
only once, a condition which rendered no isolation effect in McLaughlin's
experiment.
From the outcome of his experiment, McLaughlin concluded that
"vividness affects processes of search and retrieval and may not affect
the strength of stored information" (1968, p. 101). The results of some
other recent studies using tests of recognition seem to contradict his
conclusion to some extent. These other studies were not so much con-
cerned with the retention of the isolated item itself but with the fate
of the items immediately preceding or following it. For example, Ellis,
Detterman, Runcie, McCarver, and Craig (1971) found a "profound
anterograde amnesia," with no accompanying retrograde amnesia, by
introducing a photograph of a nude as the isolated item into a series of
photographs from popular magazines. The authors interpreted their re-
sults from an information-processing point of view, stating that during
input the photograph of the nude inhibited rehearsal of prior informa-
tion and impeded admission of new information to the short-term store.
As rehearsal was probably minimal, in view of the kind of material used
(see Shaffer and Shiffrin, 1972), only an anterograde amnesia occurred.
The outcome of a study by Schulz (1971) is in agreement with the
results of Ellis et al. In Schulz's experiment, isolation was effected by
inserting a 'high-priorityevent' in a series of common words (see Tulving,
1969); these events were names of famous people. Recognition of the
items immediately preceding and following the high-priority events was
significantly decreased, owing, the author suggests, to losses of effective
presentation time at input of the items concerned.
The interpretations of Ellis et al. and of Schulz are somewhat difficult
to reconcile with McLaughlin's position. When Schulz states that "ex-
clusive processing of the [high-priority event] is carried over into the
following item" (p. 327), this suggests an input interpretation of the
isolation effect itself, instead of an explanation in terms of search and

This content downloaded from 147.188.128.74 on Fri, 13 Nov 2015 07:45:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE ISOLATION EFFECT 499

retrieval as McLaughlin proposed. It should be noted though that apart

from the latter statement, an input explanation of the spread of the
effect is not necessarily contradictory to an output interpretation of the
effect per se - that is, of the superior recall of an isolated item.

METHOD

Subjects - The 120 undergraduates at the University of Utrecht who served

as subjects were fulfilling a course requirement. Testing was done individually.
Materials and apparatus- For initial learning, a set of 15 Dutch five-letter
words was selected from Linschoten's frequency count. These words had a mean
frequency of occurrence in the Dutch language of 21 per million. For each
item, a slide was produced to be shown by a Kodak Carousel projector, timed
by means of an electronic device. The words were all printed on a green back-
ground, except one, which was also produced on a bright red background (the
isolated word in the experimental conditions).
For the test of recognition, a set of 55 words was selected to meet the criteria
mentioned above; the set included, of course, the 15 items from initial learning.
These words were printed, without exception, on a white background.
Procedure - The 120 subjects served in four groups of 30; two experimental
conditions, R (recall) and H (recognition), and their controls, RC and HC.
Each group received one trial on the 15 words in initial learning. In groups R
and H, the isolated item, the one on a red background, was at serial position 9.
Groups RC and HC saw all slides on a green background. All groups were in-
structed to try to remember as many of the slides as possible. No indication
was given of the way in which testing was to take place. The slides were pre-
sented at a 2-sec rate.
Immediately after initial learning, there was an interval during which each
subject received a paper with series of numbers and of letters. He was given
10 min to complete as many series as possible. This interval was introduced
for two reasons: (a) to preclude too strong a recency effect, which might rule
out the possibility of detecting an isolation effect and (b) since recognition
tests were used, to prevent the occurrence of ceiling effects.
Immediately after that interval, the free-recall groups, R and RC, were given
3 min to write down as many of the words as possible. Then they took a test of
recognition, during which the 55 slides were presented successively for 6 sec
per item. The subjects had to respond to each item with yes or no, depending
on whether or not they recognized each individual item as one from initial
learning. The recognition groups, H and HC, took only the test of recognition.
To minimize idiosyncratic effects of specific items on the serial-position
scores, five list orders were constructed for initial learning. The isolated item
or its nonisolated counterpart was always at position 9. For the test of recogni-
tion, six orders were constructed. The 'isolated' item (in neutral form) always
took position 37. The subjects were assigned to groups on the basis of the
order of their appearance at the laboratory. Order of assignment was counter-
balanced with respect to group and order of items.

This content downloaded from 147.188.128.74 on Fri, 13 Nov 2015 07:45:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
500 VAN DAM, PEECK, BRINKERINK, AND GORTER

RESULTS

The frequencies of correct responses on the tests of recall and recog-

nition in relation to the serial position of the items in initial learning are
shown in Figures 1, 2, and 3. The frequencies of false alarms in the tests
of recognition for groups H, HC, R, and RC did not significantly differ

24
23
22
21 "
20
19
18 •a---
17-
16
ci 15

S 10

56 -
7
3
-

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
SERIAL POSITION

Figure 1. Frequenciesof correctresponseson the test of free recall by groupR

(solid line) and groupRC (brokenline), as a functionof the serialpositionof
the itemsin initiallearning

30
29
28
27
26
U 25
24
23
0 ', - "'•
S22 - -"
n

t
21
2 20
19
18
- ,

17-
16,-
15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
SERIAL POSITION

Figure2. Frequenciesof correctresponseson the test of recognitionby groupH

(solid line) and groupHC (brokenline), as a functionof the serialpositionof
the itemsin initiallearning

This content downloaded from 147.188.128.74 on Fri, 13 Nov 2015 07:45:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE ISOLATION EFFECT 501

30
29
28 - """• ,
27
26-
w , ,
N S252
23
o O 22 /
21 . t
20
19
18
17 ,/
16 -
15

1 2 3 14 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
SERIAL POSITION

Figure3. Frequenciesof correctresponseson the test of recognitionby groupR

(solid line) and groupRC (brokenline), as a functionof the serialpositionof
the itemsin initiallearning

[median test x2 = .13, df = 3, p > .05]. The median number of false

alarms was 3.58.
On the test of free recall (group R versus group RC), a strong isola-
tion effect was obtained [x2 = 9.87, df = 1, p < .01]. Showing the iso-
lated item against a bright red background and the neutral items against
a green evidently suffices to produce the effect. There were no clear
indications of a spread of the effect over neighboring serial positions.
The results suggest that the occurrence of an isolated item (group R)
has some influence on the frequency of recall of the items that had imme-
diately followed it in initial learning, but this effect extended over only
two items and was not significant for the serial positions involved.
For groups R and RC, the mean ordinal positions of recall of the
critical item and its nonisolated counterpart were 4.25 and 3.00. So the
possibility can be ruled out that earlier recall of the critical item by
group R (i.e., after a shorter retention interval) could have contributed
to the obtained effect. The mean recall of groups R and RC was 6.13
and 5.50 respectively; the difference between these values was not sig-
nificant [t = 1.16, df = 58].
On the test of recognition, there were quite different results. Figure 2
shows the frequencies of correct responses (hits) on the test of recogni-
tion by groups H and HC as a function of the serial positions of the
items in initial learning. No isolation effect was discernible [x2 = 0, df
1, p > .05], and inspection of the figure reveals that this cannot be
ascribed to a ceiling effect. The mean recognition scores of the experi-
mental and control groups did not differ significantly [t = .93, df = 58].

This content downloaded from 147.188.128.74 on Fri, 13 Nov 2015 07:45:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
502 VAN DAM, PEECK, BRINKERINK, AND GORTER

The frequencies of recognition of the items in serial positions 8 and 10

by group H appear to be somewhat lower than the corresponding fre-
quencies for group HC. These differences were nonsignificant, however,
so there is no clear indication of retrograde or anterograde effects due to
the occurrence of the critical item (group H).
As was mentioned earlier, the subjects in groups R and RC also took
the test of recognition after completing the test of free recall. The results
of this test of recognition are shown in Figure 3. Again, there was no
indication of an isolation effect [X2= 1, 29, df = 1, p > .05], nor was a
significant difference observable between the frequencies of recognition
of the experimental and the control group [t = .41, df = 58]. These
results are therefore in accordance with the results for groups H and HC.
Although no significant isolation effect was obtained for group R on the
recognition test, the difference between the frequencies of recognition
of the critical item by groups R and RC surpassed the corresponding
difference between groups H and HC. Also, the spread of the effect
was somewhat more pronounced, although in this case too no significant
difference existed. Possibly the preceding test of free recall had a slight
influence on the recognition scoresof group R.

DISCUSSION

The results of this experiment clearly support the main findings of

McLaughlin and replicate earlier findings of the present authors (van
Dam and Peeck, 1973): an isolation effect was found on the tests of
free recall, while no such effect was observable on the tests of recogni-
tion. This suggests that the isolation effect in this study was localizable
primarilyin the retrieval phase.
A similar outcome may be expected in all cases where isolation of an
item in a list is achieved by attaching surplus information of some kind
to an item. By this argument, the surplus information functions at the
time of recall as a subject-produced retrieval cue which results in repro-
duction of the item - provided, of course, that a sufficiently strong con-
nection has been established between the surplus information and the
item to be recalled. This may take more than one learning trial, as
McLaughlin's data indicate. The benefit of surplus information in initial
learning seems to get lost in a test of recognition, however, where the
items per se serve as (experimenter-produced) retrieval cues and, by
their sheer presentation without surplus information, probably induce
subjects to judge them just as presented, without making use of poten-

This content downloaded from 147.188.128.74 on Fri, 13 Nov 2015 07:45:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE ISOLATION EFFECT 503

tially self-producible retrieval cues represented in memory (e.g., back-

ground color) that might enhance trace actualization. This argument is
in line with Tulving's conclusion (1968) that the effectiveness of re-
trieval cues is critically dependent upon the extent to which they coincide
with additional information stored about each to-be-remembered item
at the time of input.
As to the question of the localization of the von Restorff effect, the
argument just made implies the possibility that the effect in the end may
be based on the organizational structure at the trace level but that this
structure does not automatically facilitate trace retrieval in tests of rec-
ognition. So the question of the localization of the von Restorff effect
appears to be not a matter of simple decision between storage processes
or retrieval processes but rather a function of the interaction of organiza-
tional factors in memory with the quality of the available functional
retrieval cues.
Though no significant spread of effect was observed in this experiment,
in both experimental conditions the recognition of the items adjacent to
the critical one appeared depressed in comparison to the control condi-
tions. It seems likely that the effect of an isolated item on adjacent items
will depend on characteristics of the experimental method such as the
kind of isolation introduced, the interval between the items, and such
other factors as that emotionally arousing items (e.g., photographs of
nudes) are more likely to influence other items than are more neutral
isolateditems (e.g., CVCs typed in differentsymbols).

Notes
Address requestsfor reprintsto the PsychologicalLaboratory,University of
Utrecht, Varkenmarkt2, Utrecht, the Netherlands.Received for publication
November21, 1973;revision,April25, 1974.

References
Ellis, N. R., Detterman,D. K., Runcie,D., McCarver,R. B., and Craig, E. M.
1971. Amnesiceffectsin short-termmemory.Journalof Experimental Psy-
chology 89:357-361.
Green, R. T. 1956. Surpriseas a factor in the Von Restorffeffect. Journalof
Experimental Psychology 52:340-344.
McLaughlin,J. P. 1968. Recall and recognitionmeasuresof the Von Restorff
effect in serial learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology 78:99-102.
Restorff,H. von. 1933.tiber die Wirkungvon Bereichsbildungen
im Spurenfeld.
Psychologische Forschung 18:299-342.

This content downloaded from 147.188.128.74 on Fri, 13 Nov 2015 07:45:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
504 VAN DAM, PEECK, BRINKERINK, AND GORTER

Schulz, L. S. 1971. Effects of high-priority events on recall and recognition of

other events. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 10:322-330.
Schaffer, W. 0., and Shiffrin, R. M. 1972. Rehearsal and storage of visual in-
formation. Journal of Experimental Psychology 92:292-296.
Tulving, E. 1968. When is recall higher than recognition? Psychonomic Science
10:53-54.
Tulving, E. 1969. Retrograde amnesia in free recall. Science 164:88-90.
van Dam, G., and Peeck, J. 1973. A comparison of recall and recognition mea-
sures of the Von Restorff effect. University of Utrecht Psychological Labo-
ratory, report 6.
Wallace, W. P. 1965. Review of the historical, empirical, and theoretical status
of the Von Restorff phenomenon. Psychological Bulletin 63:410-424.

This content downloaded from 147.188.128.74 on Fri, 13 Nov 2015 07:45:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions