The effects of gender on the retrieval of episodic and semantic components of autobiographical memory
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite consistent evidence that women exhibit greater episodic memory specificity than men, little attention has been paid to gender differences in the production of episodic details during autobiographical recall under conditions of high and low retrieval support. Similarly the role of gender on the production of semantic details used to support autobiographical memory recollections of specific events has been largely unexplored. In the present study an undergraduate sample of 50 men and 50 women were assessed using the Autobiographical Interview (Levine, Svoboda, Hay, Winocur, & Moscovitch, 2002). Women recalled more episodic information compared to men in the high retrieval support condition, whereas no gender differences were found in the low retrieval support condition. In addition, women produced more repetitions compared to men in the high retrieval support condition. No gender differences were found in the production of semantic details. These results are interpreted in terms of gender differences in encoding and reminiscence practices. This research adds to the literature on gender differences in memory recall and suggests that gender is an important variable in explaining individual differences in AM recall.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it