Fig. 2.

Illustration of key paradigms. Panel A: Design by Tulving and Kroll (1995): pre-familiarised and novel items are presented intermixed at critical study for which recognition memory was later tested. Panel B: Design of von Restorff/distinctiveness paradigm: items of the same type/class are presented in lists together with a conceptually or perceptually deviant item (e.g. different font type/colour), memory for which can compared to an item same position in a control list without deviants. Panel C: Rule based design by Greve et al. (2017): At study new scenes were paired with new words, which had the same valence as expected from a previous familiarisation phase (low PE) or the opposite valence (high PE). A forced-choice memory test matched target and foils to be of same valence and equally familiar. Panel D: Reward PE design by De Loof et al. (2018): one, two or four Swahili words are presented as options from which the rewarded word is selected, which manipulated the size of RPE. Panel E: Design by Reggev et al. (2018): Judging whether a noun-adjective is congruent and subsequently testing memory for the nouns. Panel F: Item novelty assessed by presenting objects vs. non-objects or words vs. non-words in Kroll and Potter (1984). Panel G: Mismatch design from Kumaran and Maguire (2006): sequences of objects were represented twice, wherein the second presentation, the order of objects was either unchanged (S_rep), changed after the first half (S_half) or completely new (S_new).