Age differences in memory for meaningful and arbitrary associations: A memory retrieval account.
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
Older adults typically show poor associative memory performance relative to younger adults. This age-related effect, however, is mediated by the meaningfulness of the materials used, such that age differences are minimized with the use of information that is consistent with prior knowledge. While this effect has been interpreted as facilitative learning through schematic support, the role of memory retrieval on this effect has yet to be explored. Using an associative memory paradigm that varied the extent of controlled retrieval for previously studied meaningful or arbitrary associations, older and younger adults in the present study retrieved realistic and unrealistic grocery item prices in a speeded, or in a slow, more control-based retrieval condition. There were no age differences in memory for realistic (meaningful) prices in either condition; however, younger adults showed better memory than older adults for unrealistic prices in the controlled retrieval condition only. These results suggest that age differences in memory for arbitrary associations can, at least partly, be accounted for by age reductions in strategic, controlled retrieval. (PsycINFO Database Record
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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