[[Semantics]] do not always play a role in encoding specificity; memory, rather, depends upon the context at encoding and retrieval.<ref name="Semantics revisited" /> Early research has shown that semantically related cues should be effective in retrieving a word provided the semantic cue was encoded along with the target word. If the semantically related word is not present at the time of encoding, it will not be efficient at cuing recall for the target word.<ref name="Semantic Interpretation">{{cite journal|last=Reder|first=Lynne|coauthorsauthor2=John Anderson, |author3=Robert Bjork |title=A semantic interpretation of encoding specificity|journal=Journal of Experimental Psychology|year=1974|volume=102|issue=4|pages=648–656|doi=10.1037/h0036115}}</ref>
Regardless of semantic relatedness of the paired words, participants more effectively recalled target words that had been primed when prompted for recall.<ref name=Tulving /> Many of the following experiments employed a method modeled off of Thomson and Tulving’s. All, however, had slight variations which allowed the researchers to discover their own individual findings. The following table shows the importance of priming through word pairs to achieve enhanced recall of words encoded together.<ref name="Two-Phase Model">{{cite journal|last=Bahrick|first=Harry|title=Two-phase model for prompted recall|journal=Psychological Review|year=1970|volume=77|issue=3|pages=215–222|doi=10.1037/h0029099}}</ref>
Line 60:
====Auditory Environment====
The level and kind of noise in any given encoding environment will affect the ability to recall the information encoded in a different auditory environment.<ref name="Music auditory">{{cite journal|last=Grant|first=Harry|coauthorsauthor2=Lane C. Bredahl, |author3=John Clay, |author4=Jennifer Ferrie, |author5=Jane Groves, |author6=Timothy McDorman, |author7=Veronica Dark |title=Context-dependent memory for meaningful material: Information for students|journal=Applied Cognitive Psychology|year=1998|volume=12|pages=617–623|doi=10.1002/(sici)1099-0720(1998120)12:6<617::aid-acp542>3.0.co;2-5}}</ref> Students receive higher scores on tests when they study for and take examinations in environments that have similar auditory background distractions, thus proving that the context-dependency effect applies to meaningful scenarios in addition to unrelated word lists. While a typical college student’s study environment often includes background noise, test environments are typically quieter.<ref name="Music auditory" /> In line with the encoding specificity principle, this mismatch at encoding and retrieval is detrimental to test performance.<ref name=Textbook>{{cite book|last=Robinson-Riegler|first=Bridget|title=Cognitive Psychology: Applying the Science of the mind|year=2008|publisher=Pearson Publishing|___location=Boston, MA|isbn=0-205-03364-4|pages=246–248}}</ref> Students who study with background noise recall just as much information as students studying in silence, provided they are tested in the same type of environment as which the information was encoded.<ref name="Music auditory" />
===The Voluntary Retrieval of Autobiographical Memory===
Line 69:
===Alcohol===
Information encoded and stored while intoxicated is retrieved more effectively when later recall tests are performed while intoxicated as compared to recall while sober.<ref name=alcohol>{{cite journal|last=Weingartner|first=Herbert|coauthorsauthor2=Wolansa Adefras, |author3=James E. Eich, |author4=Dennis L. Murphy |title=Encoding-imagery specificity in alcohol state-dependent learning|journal=Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory|year=1976|volume=2|issue=1|pages=83–87|doi=10.1037/0278-7393.2.1.83}}</ref> This finding is a variation of the context-dependency effect of the encoding specificity principle and is much more apparent with low-imagery words than high-imagery words. Both high and low imagery words, however, are less likely to be recalled while intoxicated due to the inherent nature of intoxication.<ref name=alcohol />
