Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Jun 1.
Published in final edited form as: Psychon Bull Rev. 2018 Jun;25(3):1087–1103. doi: 10.3758/s13423-017-1302-z

Figure 5.

Figure 5

In Experiment 4 the pairs presented during the study phase were grouped by scene. The scene name was presented above the pair. All objects in Experiment 4 were temporal-only related (e.g., snake and cactus). There were no temporal-plus-semantic pairs (e.g., none of the pairs consisted of two objects from the same category, such as two cows or two snakes). During the recognition practice phase, participants were presented with two objects that would be plausible to find in the named scene (e.g., both a tractor and a bale of straw would plausibly be found in a farm scene) and asked which object they remembered studying in the farm scene. At test, participants were sequentially presented objects and the name of a scene in which it was likely to be found. Participants made old-new recognition judgments regarding whether they had indeed previously seen the presented object in the name scene.