Content deleted Content added
Line 5:
In a laboratory study, a subject presented with an unrelated word pair is able to recall a target word with much more accuracy when prompted with the unrelated word it was matched with at the time of encoding, than if presented with a semantically related word that was not available during the time of encoding.<ref name="Semantics revisited">{{cite journal|last=Hannon|first=Brenda|author2=Fergus Craik|title=Encoding specificity revisited: The role of semantics|journal=Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology|year=2001|volume=55|issue=3|pages=231–243|doi=10.1037/h0087369}}</ref> During a recall task, people benefit equally from a weakly related cue word as from a strongly related cue word, provided the weakly related word was present at encoding.<ref name="Alzheimers RI-48">{{cite journal|authors=Adam, S.; M. Van der Linden, A Ivanoiu, A.-C. Juillerat,S. Bechet, E. Salmon|title=Optimization of encoding specificity for the diagnosis of early AD: The RI-48 task|journal=Journal of Clinical and Experimental neuropsychology|year=2007|volume=29|issue=5|pages=477–487|doi=10.1080/13803390600775339}}</ref>
==Specific results== (In relation to the simpsons)
===Role of semantics===
| |||