external and internal memory aids: when and how often … · external and internal memory aids:...

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General1986, Vol. 115, No. 3,267-280

Copyright 1986 by the American Psychological Association, Inc.0096-3443/86/J00.75

External and Internal Memory Aids: When andHow Often Do We Use Them?

Margaret Jean Intons-Peterspn and JoAnne FournierIndiana University

What kinds of memory aids do people use to help them remember in their daily lives? Depending

on the situation, they may use internal aids (e.g., mental rehearsal, imagery) of the types usuallystudied in the laboratory or external aids (e.g., reminder notes, asking someone else), which arerarely investigated but may be often used. College students indicated that they used external memoryaids more often than internal aids (a) to prepare for future remembering than to remember pastsituations, (b) to remember spatial tasks than to remember verbal tasks, and (c) to remember to do

things in the past than to remember information from the past. External aids were rated as moredependable, easier to use, more accurate, and more preferred than internal ones. At least one exter-nal aid, taking notes, affects encoding and not just retrieval, as shown by (a) its facilitation of remem-

bering even when the notes were not available as retrieval cues, and (b) its induction of greatercategorization of the to-be-remembered items than the use of some other memory aids.

When we want to remember to buy groceries on the way

home after work, we may write grocery lists in advance. When

we want to remember to bring a book to school in the morning,

we may put the book in our briefcase the night before. When

we are trying to remember a telephone number long enough to

dial it, we may rehearse the number. These activities demon-

strate the use of memory aids—devices or strategies that are

deliberately used to enhance memory. Simple and ordinary as

the memory aids may seem, they play major roles in our daily

lives, and their use is the central focus of this article. We begin

our investigation by collecting normative information about the

use of different types of memory aids in a variety of situations,

and then we examine encoding and cuing properties of selected

memory aids.

Memory aids may be classified into two general types (see

Harris, 1980, 1984). Some aids involve reliance on memory

internal to oneself, such as mental rehearsing, alphabetic

searching, mental retracing, the method of loci, and other mne-

monic systems (internal aids). Other aids, which are rarely stud-

ied, involve the use of tangible, physical aids external to the

person, such as making lists, writing on a calendar, and putting

an item in a special place (external aids). Roughly speaking,

internal aids correspond to the variables that are often tested

in laboratory research on memory (and that may overlap with

memorial processes themselves), whereas external aids corre-

spond to the techniques people claim to use as memory

The authors are indebted to D. Herrmann and U. Neisser for giving

us the situations used in their Inventory of Everyday Memory Experi-ences, to S. Banker, J. Buting, R. Adams, and J. Deckard for their helptesting subjects, and to J. Harris, D. Herrmann, E. Magiste, L. Peterson,

M. Smyth, and Y. Waern for their trenchant comments and their en-

couragement.Correspondence concerning this aricle should be addressed to M. J.

Intons-Peterson, Department of Psychology, Indiana University, Bloo-

mington, Indiana 47405.

prompts in their daily lives. The characteristics of both internal

and external aids might be combined, as when one tries to bol-

ster internal memory retrieval by the external feedback of voice

(saying out loud) or by writing (trial technique). The latter, com-

bination aids, and both internal and external memory aids, are

illustrated in Table 1.

The characteristics of external aids suggest that they are likely

to be used for the following conditions:

1. Situations in which memory must override the potentially

interfering events that often separate learning and recall, for ex-

ample, remembering to buy groceries after work. The use of

external aids should be particularly important when we must

attend to the intervening activity.

2. Situations with a long temporal interval separating learn-

ing and recall, as when we make an appointment for 2 months

in the future. Calendar notes seem appropriate in this context.

3. When there is a high premium on highly accurate, per-

haps verbatim remembering or when internal aids are not

trusted to yield memorial accuracy, for example, using a timer

as a reminder to remove a cake from an oven.

4. When the to-be-remembered information is difficult, does

not cohere readily, and so forth, and external aids are needed to

preserve important aspects. Lecture notes could be examples.

5. When there is limited time available for encoding, re-

hearsal, and using mnemonic techniques. Putting an item in a

special place might be used when one does not have time to

develop a mnemonic system.

6. When memory load is to be avoided. This situation might

occur when full attention must be allocated to other activities,

and one does not wish to risk possible practice interference

from to-be-remembered information that is being held in

memory.

Internal aids may be used in the following situations:

1. When one does not want to rely on external prompts. Re-

citing a role in a play is a good illustration.

2. When external prompts are difficult to prepare (as when

267

268 MARGARET JEAN INTONS-PETERSON AND JOANNE FOURN1ER

Table 1

The Memory Aids, Study 1

Type- Memory aid and description

I Alphabetic searching: Going through the alphabet one letter at a time to see if it sparks a memory.E Asking someone else to remind you: Asking someone else to help you remember or asking if she or he remembers.E Calendar notes: Writing down on a calendar, address book, etc., what you want to remember.I Face-name association: Identifying a person's distinctive features) and connecting the person's name with the feature(s).1 Menial rehearsing: Mentally repeating to yourself what you want to remember.1 Mental retracing: Thinking about something that happened before, or that may happen, step by step, in an attempt to remember

something.I Method of loci: Sometimes called the "mental walk technique." Using an orderly arrangement of locations that you mentally associate

with the items you want to remember. Then, when you try to remember, you "mentally walk" around the locations, rememberingeach item you "put" in the location.

I No memory aid: Expecting memory to "pop up" when needed.I Peg-word system: Learning a series of number-word associations and then forming a vivid image of what you want to remember along

with the number-word associations. For example, using the "one is a bun, two is a shoe, three is a tree . . ." technique, you mightimagine the first item you want to remember, say a book, as sandwiched inside a gigantic hamburger bun.

E Photographs: Using pictures to remind you of something.E Putting something in a special place: Putting what you need to remember in a place where you will be sure to see it.E Reminder notes: Writing down what you want to remember on a paper that you can take with you.I Rhymes: Using rhymes about what you want to remember (like using the rhyme, "Thirty days hath September. . ."to remember the

number of days in the months).C Saying out loud: Saying something out loud as a way to remember (for example, by telling another person or asking someone to repeat

what you have said).I Story method: Linking items or memories together by telling a story about them, or by making sentences about them.I Tie to other life events: Remembering by associating with another life event (such as "right after lunch" or "just before a history class").E Timer: Using a mechanical, electrical or other timing device.C Trial technique: Trying to write out or imagine part of the information to see if it sparks a memory.E Writing on hand: Writing what you want to remember on your hand.

Others

Note. Italicized names were those used to identify the memory aids in the left-most columns of the answer sheets.' I = internal; E = external; C = combination.

paper and pencil are not available) or are hard to use. For exam-ple, when one attends an informal lecture without writing paperand has to rely on internal memory aids, such as rehearsal.

3. When the request for recall is unanticipated and no exter-nal aids were prepared at the time of learning. Alphabetizing,retracing, trying to relate to-be-remembered items to life'sevents all might be used in this situation.

4. When the preparation of external prompts might interferewith comprehension. For example, taking notes during a com-plicated lecture may interfere with understanding the material.

5. When external aids would be undesirable or inconvenient.Carrying multiple lists, timers, large numbers of photographs,and so forth, could be nuisances.

6. When the interval between learning and recall is so shortthat external aids are not assumed to be needed, as when oneneeds to remember a telephone number only long enough todial it. Simple rehearsal may suffice.

Some common themes run through each set, allowing classi-fication of the situations in terms of whether a person knowsthat memory will be required and has the opportunity to pre-pare for the recall. When a person has this knowledge, externalaids are likely to be used because these aids increase the likeli-hood of accurate remembering. In other words, external aidswill be used for future remembering unless their use is contrain-dicated (as when taking notes could interfere with comprehen-sion). This is true despite the labor occasioned by their use.When recall is unexpected and when the person has not pre-pared external aids, internal aids will be used. These expecta-

tions are tested by questionnaires in Studies 1 and 2. Despiteits vulnerability to such hazards as demand characteristics andfallible memory, the use of self-report questionnaires seems tobe the most effective means of gathering normative data aboutsituational memory-aid contingencies.

The third study addresses possible encoding or recedingeffects of the preparation of external memory aids on recall ofthe information and the effects of absence of a prepared exter-nal memory aid. Intuitively, we seem to have a better chance ofremembering grocery items if we have prepared a list eventhough that list was left at home. The preparation of a list offersopportunities for receding which, by enhancing the similarityof the encoding/receding and the retrieval processes, should fa-cilitate recall. In other words, under certain conditions, externalaids may influence the contents of memory, a role typically at-tributed to internal aids.

Some limited information is available about the use of mem-ory aids. Because of the assumed importance of the situation,we focused on experiments that had investigated the use ofmemory aids for the past and future remembering of a numberof situations. Unfortunately, most research on memory aids hasprobed their frequencies of use either in general (specifying nosituations) or in a limited number of situations.

Harris's (1980) work represents the former type. He askedadults to indicate how often they used each of about 20 memoryaids (see examples in Table 1). No specific situations were iden-tified. His subjects indicated that, in general, they used externalmemory aids more often than internal ones.

EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL MEMORY AIDS 269

During the final segment of the interviews, he explored the

situational specificity of memory aids by asking the subjects

how they "set about remembering" and "how likely is it that

[they]. . .would be successful" in remembering in 12 different

situations. Harris considered the results to these latter queries

to be uninformative and did not report the results in detail in

his article. Perlmutter (1978) also asked subjects to estimate

their ability to remember (or the likelihood of their forgetting)

without describing specific situations.

Other research has examined single situations. Meacham and

Leiman (1982) reported that having tags on key chains helped

subjects to remember to mail postcards over as many as 32 days,

and Kreutzer, Leonard, and Flavell (1975) found that children

produced more external than internal aids when asked what

they would do to remember to bring skates to school the next

day. In other relevant work, subjects were asked how they would

learn lists of unrelated words (e.g., Kick & Waite, 1971; Engle,

1967). Collectively, the results suggest that external memory

aids may be preferred to internal ones, but the limited number

of situations sampled constrains the generality of these findings.

One study deviated from this trend by using a number of situ-

ations (Herrmann & Neisser, 1978). Herrmann and Neisser

asked subjects to estimate the likelihood of remembering or for-

getting in specific situations. However, they did not evaluate the

relative use of internal and external strategies in past and future

memory situations, thus the issue of situation-specific uses of

memory aids remained unresolved.

Study 1

In the first investigation, we studied the situational specificity

of the use of memory aids. The central hypothesis was that ex-

ternal memory aids would be used more often when preparing

for future memorial situations (future remembering), whereas

internal aids would be used more often when retrieving past

memories (past remembering). These contingencies are not

trivial, for both kinds of aids could, at least theoretically, be

used for both past and future remembering. For example, con-

sider making a telephone call (e.g., numbers 1 and 7 in Table

2). To prepare for future remembering one might use internal

aids of, say, rehearsal and forming images to try to retain the

number or one could use external aids such as writing notes,

writing on the hand. To retrieve information from past remem-

bering one might try to recapture mental rehearsals, or ask a

friend for the number.

In addition to examining the use of external and internal aids

to facilitate future and past remembering, Study 1 also tested

situations that were predominantly verbal or spatial, a distinc-

tion that appears frequently in literature about cognition (e.g.,

Paivio, 1971) and hemispheric lateralization (e.g., Springer &

Deutsch, 1981). Predictions about the types of memory aids

most likely to be used in verbal and spatial situations are not

straightforward. Although the verbal nature of many internal

aids (e.g., deliberate rehearsal) should be particularly compati-

ble with verbal situations, other internal aids are distinctly spa-

tial (e.g., the method of loci) and might be more compatible

with heavily spatial situations. Similarly, some external aids are

distinctly verbal, such as reminder notes, whereas others are

highly spatial, such as diagrams. To our knowledge, extant

models of memory do not specify the types of memory aids that

are common (or optimal) for the above distinctions; hence, they

make no predictions for the verbal-spatial distinction.

Until now, we have talked about the frequency of use of mem-

ory aids without classifying the meaning of this concept. In fact,

the concept of frequency may assume two meanings: one corre-

sponds to the generality of use across situations and the other

refers to the frequency with which a memory aid is used in spe-

cific situations, given that it is applied at all. This is an impor-

tant distinction, for there is no a priori reason why the two

should be correlated. Some memory aids may be applied to a

wide range of situations, whereas others have more circum-

scribed applicability. For instance, some aids, such as asking

others, may function as "fall-back" tactics in many different

situations, but these aids are not necessarily used often in a par-

ticular situation, such as asking for a person's name. We hy-

pothesized that, because internal aids do not seem to be as

closely linked to characteristics of specific situations as external

aids, they would be more versatile than external aids and would

be used in a wider range of situations. External aids, however,

may be considered more reliable than internal aids. If so, they

might be used more frequently than internal aids, given that

they are applied to the situation.

In addition to the generality and frequency of the use of the

aids, we were interested in why particular aids were chosen.

Some memory aids may require more effort (e.g., the method

of loci) than others. Some aids, such as reminder notes, may

be considered both more accurate and more dependable than

others. Hence, in Study 1, we also asked the subjects to rate the

memory aids for dependability, ease of use, accuracy, and their

preference for using the aid.

Study 1 required the selection of (a) memory aids to sample

internal and external types; and (b) situations that were past and

future, verbal and spatial, and all of which described a number

of commonplace memorial situations. For the memory aids, we

drew on Harris's (1980) list. Some of the memory aids were

revised (e.g., substituting calendar notes for diary) and others

were added (photographs, saying out loud, the trial technique,

and tying to other life events) after initial pretesting. As Harris

(1980) discusses, some internal aids are difficult to distinguish

from simple methods of remembering (e.g., mental rehearsal).

To address this problem we asked pilot subjects to describe the

specific "memory aids or memory devices that [they] use to

help themselves remember." The memory aids that they de-

scribed are listed in Table 1.

The situations were adapted from Herrmann and Neisser

(1978). All together, 16 situations were cast into two forms. One

form assessed future memory and the other form assessed past

memory (see examples in Table 2). These situations were se-

lected so that half were predominantly verbal, and the other half

were predominantly spatial.

Method

Subjects. One hundred twenty female and 101 male students in intro-ductory psychology classes participated as one way to fulfill partial class

requirements.Materials. Booklets were prepared that contained (a) the instruc-

tions, (b) an alphabetical listing of the definitions of the memory aids

270 MARGARET JEAN INTONS-PETERSON AND JOANNE FOURNIER

Table 2Samples of the Situations, Study 1

Situation

Future-verbal

\bu have just stepped into a phone booth and have called a long distance operator for a new phone number you need. After he gives it to you, howdo you remember it while you are dialing?

You are sitting with a bunch of friends who are telling jokes. You hear a couple that you really like and want to remember. How do you rememberthem?

You have just looked through your cupboards and realize that it is time to go to the grocery store. How do you remember what you need to buy?

Future-spatial

You are going to begin a two-day trip tomorrow to visit a place you have never seen before. \bu look at a map for directions. What would you do totry to remember where to go if you couldn't take the map with you?

You and your friends are seated at a table in a fancy restaurant. The waitress comes to the table and introduces herself. How can you be sure toremember what she looks like when you need her later?

You are taking some visiting relatives to an amusement park. How can you be sure to show them all the important (fun) areas?

Past-verbal

You are interested in making a long distance phone call to a number you have called before, but you don't have the number. How would you try toremember it now, without calling a long distance operator?

You are sitting with a bunch of friends who are telling jokes. You know that you have a couple of good jokes to tell, but you can't remember them.How do you remember them?

You are at the grocery store to pick up a few things you noticed you needed when looking in your cupboards earlier. Now you can't remember themall. How do you remember?

Past-spatial

You are driving to some unfamiliar place. You looked at a map the day before but had to leave the map behind. What would you do to try toremember where to go?

You and your friends are seated at a table in a fancy restaurant. The waitress comes to the table and introduces herself. Later, when you want tospeak to her, you need to remember what she looks like. How do you remember?

You are writing to some relatives, telling them about the important (fun) areas in an amusement park. How do you remember them all?

(Table 1), (c) definitions of the five scales (see Appendix), and (d) 8 of Procedure. The subjects read through the instructions as the experi-the 32 situations. The two definitional sheets were inserted, loose, into menter read them aloud. The instructions told the subjects to place thethe booklets so that the subjects could keep these two pages in front of two sheets of definitions in front of them and to consult these sheetsthem as they worked on the situations. The results of the pretests yielded regularly as they worked through the booklet. They were told to readthe 18 memory aids defined in Table 1, plus the two additional catego- the situation described at the top of each response sheet and to decide ifries of other and no memory aid. The classifications of the aids as inter- and how often they would use each memory aid in that situation. Theynal, external, or combination were not on the sheets given to the sub- then assigned the appropriate number from the frequency scale to thatjects, nor did the instructions suggest any kind of differentiation. aid. This procedure was followed for each aid. Next, for any aids they

Sixteen situations were modified from Herrmann and Neisser's would use in the situation (i.e., any aids given a frequency-of-use rating(1978) Inventory of Memory Experiences to provide two parallel forms greater than 1), they were to rate the aid's dependability, ease of use,of past (P) and future (F) situations. Half of these situations were com- accuracy, and preference using the scales defined in the Appendix. Theposed of components prejudged by pilot subjects to be primarily verbal meaning of each of those terms was described in detail by the instruc-(V) and half, of components prejudged to be primarily spatial (S). Thus, tions. This procedure was followed for each of the eight sheets in thethere were 32 situations all together, 12 of which appear in Table 2. Eight booklet,situations, comprising two samples of each of the four combinations ofPV, PS, FV, and FS, were assigned to a subject, with the restrictions thatthe situations be different and that all situations were tested equally of- Resultsten across all of the subjects. The situations assigned to a particularsubject were randomly ordered. The first two sections of the results consider generality (the

One situation was written at the top of each of a subject's eight re- range of different situations in which a memory aid is used) andsponse sheets. The 20 memory aids were listed below, in alphabetical frequency (how often memory aids are used in those situationsorder, in the left-most column. Five additional columns were arrayed for whicn fl^y are appropriate). The third section addresses theacross the page. The subjects entered their ratings of frequency, depend- ratings of dependability, ease of use, accuracy, and preference,ability, ease of use, accuracy, and preference in these columns, using the wjthjn ̂ ̂ ^ wg consider ̂ overall use of the ajds and

thenexarninetheeffectsofspecifictypesofsituation,

of the number of times an aid was used in a given unit of time, such as Generality of use across all situations. The participants mdi-6 months or 2 weeks. Dependability referred to how often a particular cated that they used some form of memory aid in 91.1 % of thememory aid "works," (i.e., yields some kind of answer) and accuracy, situations tested (see Table 3). Of major interest is the questionto the correctness of an answer. of whether some aids are used across more situations than oth-


Table 3

Mean Ratings of Generality, Frequency, Dependability, Ease of Use, Accuracy, and Preference for Each Memory Aid, Study 1

Memory aids

ExternalAsking someone elseCalendar notesPhotographsPutting in special placeReminder notesTimerWriting on hand

InternalAlphabetical searchFace-name associationMental rehearsingMental retracingMethod of lociPeg word systemRhymesStory methodTie to other life events

CombinationSaying out loudTrial techniqueOthers

No memory aid

Generality(% situations)*

16.74.92.83.4

11.3.7

2.0

3.37.1

13.011.93.8.5.7

1.15.3

6.34.7.5

8.9C

Mean frequencyof use

4.085.013.954.944.934.573.25

3.524.604.504.484.073.573.673.914.08

4.184.204.504.26

Meandependability

4.566.175.185.726.326.145.66

3.564.704.674.674.534.504.624.664.58

4.454.256.004.04

Mean easeof use

5.686.295.345.626.215.865.54

3.754.844.694.544.594.794.954.754.76

4.924.505.254.98

Meanaccuracy

4.776.265.285.846.446.326.02

3.684.864.874.764.644.865.005.004.78

4.644.416.064.20

Meanpreference1*

2.811.802.662.461.752.233.20

3.932.293.122.862.974.093.183.523.32

3.353.551.943.30

" Percentage of 2,929 memory aids mentioned for the 32 situations.b The positive end of the preference scale was 1.c Percentage of selections of no memory aid out of 3,215 possibilities.

ers. Four were used in 10% or more of the 2,929 situations for

which subjects said that they used some form of memory aid.

These four aids were, from lowest to highest, reminder notes

(11.3%), mental retracing (11.9%), mental rehearsing (13.0%),

and—most general of all—asking someone else (16.7%). (We

were surprised by the relative popularity of relying on others.)

Moreover, although two of these four memory aids were inter-

nal and two were external, internal aids were claimed to be used

in more situations than were external ones. Thus, of the 2,929

memory aids associated with the 32 situations, 1,368 were in-

ternal and 1,223 were external (the remainder, 338, were combi-

nation and other aids). This difference was significant (p <

.001), by a sign test applied to the numbers of times individual

subjects said they would use internal and external strategies.

Generality of use for past and future remembering. Does this

generality hold across all situations or are some aids used in

more past than future memory situations and vice versa? The

data corresponded to the latter view. The seven most often used

internal memory aids and the corresponding seven external aids

were applied to the 32 situations a total of 2,556 times. Internal

aids were used 721 times for past remembering (28.2%) and 612

times for future remembering (23.9%), whereas external aids

were used 580 times in past situations (22.7%) and 643 times

in future situations (25.2%). These differences were significant,

using McNemar's (1955) test for correlated proportions, x20,

AT = 2,556) = 11.34, p < .001. Clearly, external aids are used

more generally for future than for past memorial remembering,

but the opposite result holds for internal aids.

Generality of use in verbal and spatial situations. Internal

aids were associated reliably more often with verbal (725 times,

or 28.4%) than with spatial (608 times or 23.8%) situations,

whereas external aids were associated more with spatial (690

times or 27.0%) than with verbal (533 or 20.8%) situations, x2

for correlated proportions (\,N= 2,556) = 29.85, p < .001.

As would be expected from the above results, internal aids

were used more generally in past-verbal (PV) situations (392

times, 15.3%) than in future-spatial (FS) situations (279 times,

10.9%) or in the other combinations (FV = 333 times or 13.0%;

PS = 329 times or 12.9%), whereas external aids were more

generally associated with future-spatial (FS) situations (372

times, 14.6%) than with the others (PS = 318 times or 12.4%;

FV = 271 times or 10.6%; and PV = 262 times or 10.3%). This

distribution differed significantly from chance, x2(3, N =

2,556) = 41.04, p<. 001.

Thus, when we test remembering from past and future situa-

tions, we find strong evidence for the situation-specific use of

memory aids.

Frequency of use across all situations. As expected, the most

generally used strategies were not always used frequently in spe-

cific situations (p - .38, ns. Also see Table 3). Instead, of the

five most frequently used memory aids (writing calendar notes,

putting things in a special place, reminder notes, face-name

associations, and a timer) only reminder notes were among the

most generally used aids.

Frequency of use in past-future and verbal-spatial situations.

External aids were used more frequently than internal aids for

every situational breakdown, as shown in the top two rows of

Table 4. Even with past, heavily verbal memory situations, sub-


jects said that they used external aids more often than internalones (although this relation was nonsignificant). Overall, mem-ory aids were rated as more frequent in future (M = 4.28) thanin past (4.12) situations, F(l, 2788) = 12.83, MS, = 2.45, p <.001, but they were used about equally often in verbal and spa-tial situations. Furthermore, women reported using more mem-ory aids (4.29) than men (4.11) did, F(l, 2788) = 15.73, MSC =2.45, p < .001. The interactions were not significant.

In sum, the respondents reported that they used internal aidsmore broadly than external aids in past and verbal situations,whereas they used external aids more than internal ones in fu-ture and spatial situations. If memory aids were used at all, ex-ternal aids were used more frequently than internal ones.

Ratings of dependability, ease of use, accuracy, and prefer-ence. To study some factors associated with situational mem-ory-aid dependencies, the subjects rated each aid that theywould use in a situation in terms of its dependability, ease of

use, accuracy, and preference. External aids were rated signifi-cantly more dependable, easier to use, more accurate, and more

preferred than internal aids, f{\, 2792) = 410.59, MS, = 1.98,p< .001; F(l, 2793) = 501.34, MS, = 1.92, p < .001; P(l,2767)= 367.41, MS, = 1.75, p < .001; and F(t, 2774) -140.25, MS, = 2.63, p < .001, respectively (Table 4). Note thata rating of 1 was the highest score for the preference scale, there-fore, the mean for the external aids, 2.37, indicates a higherpreference than the mean for the internal aids, 3.27. (The de-grees of freedom for the denominators of the above F valuesvaried because some ratings were missing.)

In addition, both the internal and external memory aids thatwere applied to a future situation were considered more de-pendable and more accurate than those that were applied topast situations, F(\, 2791) = 27.85, MS, = 1.91, and F(l,2768) = 17.83, MS, = 1.81 p < .001, respectively. Moreover,memory aids (collapsed over internal and external) were alsorated as easier to use and more accurate, in spatial than in ver-bal situations, ̂ 1,2794) = 4.16, MS,= 1.88, and F(l, 2765) =6.38, MS, = 1.75, p < .05, respectively.

In general, these ratings were highly intercorrelated for bothinternal and external aids (see the upper matrix of Table 5).Table 5 presents the correlational matrix for the internal aidsabove the diagonal and the matrix for the external aids belowthe diagonal. Preferred aids were rated as dependable, easy touse, and accurate.

Were these preferred aids also the most frequently used? Be-cause the units of the frequency scale and the other scalesdiffered, rank-order correlations were calculated to answer thisquestion. These intercorrelations also were high (lower portionof Table 5).

Discussion

According to these self-report data, external memory aids areused frequently to assist remembering. Moreover, the use ofboth external and internal aids was situation specific. This re-sult reinforces the importance of identifying the situations, butit also raises questions about the representativeness and possibleselectivity of the situations. Other selections might have yieldeddifferent results. Nonetheless, the situations tested in Study 1were chosen to represent predetermined, principled criteria

and to reflect common memory tasks, thus they should consti-tute a useful, informative sample. The most important outcomeis the apparent widespread use of external aids, not a precisedetermination of the exact frequency of use of each aid.

With these caveats in mind, we note that the participants re-ported that they used external aids more generally than internalaids for future remembering, whereas they used internal aidsmore generally than external aids for past remembering. Inter-nal aids were used in more of the tested siuations than wereexternal aids, a result that differs from Harris's (1980) findings.The reason for this discrepancy may well reside in methodologi-cal differences. Harris's subjects rated the frequencies of use ofmemory aids in general (no situations were described), whereasour subjects rated the frequencies with respect to specific situa-tions. His results and ours can be reconciled by assuming thathis subjects were more likely to envision future than past situa-tions and that they then associated external memory aids withthe future versions.

External aids tended to be used more frequently than internalaids, although the differences were not always statistically sig-nificant. The relatively lower use of internal aids was even truefor those aids that produce marked improvements in recall inthe laboratory, such as mnemonic devices (e.g., Bellezza, 1981;Bower, 1970; Higbee, 1979; Morris, 1977; Paivio, 1971; Roe-diger, 1980).

Study 2

Study 2 compares the external and internal memory aids thatstudents report using to remember to do things or to remembersome information.1

We tested remembering in past situations in Study 2 for threereasons. First, the estimates of use should be more accurate foraids used in the past than for those that might be used in thefuture. Second, previous tests of memory to perform actionshave studied applications for the future (e.g., Meacham & Lei-man, 1982; Kreutzer et al., 1975). External aids tended to bepreferred to internal aids for remembering to perform upcom-ing actions. We wanted to test the use of such memory aids forremembering to do things in the past Third, the use of pastmemorial situations affords a particularly sensitive test of theuse of external aids. If external aids are preferred to internalones as reminders to do things, whereas internal aids are pre-ferred as retrieval cues for information (e.g., Baddeley & Wil-kins, 1984; Harris, 1984), regardless of the temporal setting,then external aids will be used more generally and more fre-quently than internal aids for remembering to do things in thepast. Internal aids would still be used more widely than externalaids for remembering of past information.

1 The term prospective has sometimes been used to refer to memory

to do things, whereas retrospective has been used to refer to memory

for information (e.g., Baddeley & Wilkins, 1984; Harris, 1980, 1984;

Morris, 1977; Neisser, 1982). It seemed reasonable to us to treat thedimensions of temporal reference and of information/action as orthog-

onal, at least until contradictory evidence emerges, so we distinguish

between memory for actions or information and memory for past and

future remembering.


Table 4

Mean Ratings of Frequency, Dependability, Ease of Use,

Accuracy, and Preference for External and Internal Aids in

Future and Past Memory Situations Composed Primarily of

Verbal or Spatial Components, Study 1

Future

Quality

FrequencyExternalInternal

DependabilityExternalInternal

Ease of UseExternalInternal

AccuracyExternalInternal

PreferenceExternalInternal

Verbal

4.574.36

5.575.17

5.834.54

5.745.44

2.253.20

Spatial

4.474.33

5.655.26

5.954.57

5.725.62

2.443.31

Past

Verbal

4.294.27

5.244.91

5.814.34

5.375.26

2.513.23

Spatial

4.464.16

5^255.08

5.844.47

5.555.44

2.273.34

Note. For all scales except the Preference scale, the maximum positiverating was 7. For the Preference scale the most positive rating was 1.

Method

Subjects. The subjects were 108 new students from the same pool,divided evenly by sex. Half of the women and half of the men wereassigned to one booklet; the other halves were assigned to the secondbooklet.

Materials. The format of the materials was similar to that of Study1. The booklets contained instructions, definitions of the memory aids,definitions of the frequency and dependability scales, and eight situa-tions. One additional memory aid was wed, first-letter associations, de-fined as "making words from first letters (acronyms), such as UNESCOfor the f/nited Nations fducational. Scientific, and Cultural Organiza-

tion." Half of the situations described memory for information and halfdescribed memory for action. To keep the situations as comparable aspossible, save for whether information or action was to be remembered,we generated eight situations, each with an information form and anaction form. For example, one information form read, "In the past, youprobably planned to buy some food on the way home. What did you doto try to remember what to buy?" The action version read, "In the past,you probably planned to buy some food on the way home. What didyou do to try to remember to stop at the store?" Note that the informa-tion version involved identifying what is to be purchased, whereas theaction version explicitly stated an action to be performed. The informa-tion version did not exclude the possibility of action, but the actionversion required it. The form of the eight situations assigned to a partic-ular subject and the ordering of the situations were randomized, withthe restriction that remembering information and action be testedequally often for each subject and that, across subjects, each form ofeach situation be tested equally often.

The frequency and dependability scales were taken from Study 1.Procedure. The procedure was identical to that of Study 1, except

that the subjects rated frequency of using the memory aids and theirdependability only.

Results

Generality of use across all situations. As with Study 1, sub-

jects claimed to use memory aids in almost 90% of the situa-

tions, and the generality of use varied across the situations (Ta-

ble 6). Four memory aids were used in 10% or more of the eight

situations, regardless of whether the task was to remember ac-

tion or information. The memory aids used more generally for

remembering to do things were reminder notes (18.0% of the

situations), asking someone else (14.0%), mental rehearsing

(12.0%), and mental retracing (7.1%). The same aids also were

said to be used more generally for remembering information:

The percentages were 17.2, 13.0, 12.0, and 8.3, respectively.

Hence, regardless of whether the situations demanded remem-

bering information or doing things, the subjects were more

likely to try two external aids, reminder notes and asking some-

Table 5

Pearson Product-Moment (r) and Spearman Rank-Order (p) Correlations Between Qualities

of Internal and External Memory Aids, Study 1

Qualities ofexternal aids

Qualities of internal aids

Dependability Ease of use Accuracy Preference Frequency

DependabilityEase of useAccuracyPreference

DependabilityEase of useAccuracyPreferenceFrequency

.49

.79-.45

.47

.81-.48

.40

.50

.47-.35

p

.50

.48-.34

.27

.71

.54

-.43

.71

.54

-.46.33

-.34-.19-.34

-.36-.22-.36

-.30

.38

.31

.33-.38

Note. In each case, the entries above the diagonals are for internal aids and the entries below the diagonals are for external aids; all ps < .001.


Table 6

Mean Ratings of Generality, Frequency, and Dependability for Each Memory Aid in Action and in Information Situations, Study 2

Action Situations Information Situations

Memory aids

ExternalAsking someone elseCalendar notesPhotographsPutting in special placeReminder notesTimerWriting on hand

InternalAlphabetic searchFace-name associationFirst-letter associationMental rehearsingMental retracingMethod of lociPeg word systemRhymesStory methodTie to other life events

CombinationSaying out loudTrial techniqueOthers

No memory aid

Generality(% situations)"

14.010.7

1.15.9

18.03.03.9

1.23.61.3

12.07.12.00.20.30.86.1

6.71.80.3

11. y


4.045.312.044.005.441.903.32

2.112.603.564.483.703.060.880.721.674.19

3.743.541.624.30

Meandependability

4.515.802.344.505.922.604.05

1.693.393.064.723.762.452.251.381.254.56

4.042.880.003.72

Generality(% situations)1"

13.010.41.75.1

17.22.73.7

1.83.51.7

12.08.32.60.40.40.75.6

6.92.00.2

11. 7"


4.084.621.484.585.251.743.11

2.402.942.484.584.343.561.241.082.003.95

3.833.331.684.18

Meandependability

4.575.572.095.105.931.754.20

1.832.492.904.964.493.120.460.382.234.04

4.282.671.753.91

" Percentage of 1,916 memory aids mentioned for the eight action situations.b Percentage of 1,993 memory aids mentioned for the eight information situations.° Percentage of selections of no memory aid out of 2,165 possibilities.d Percentage of selections of no memory aid out of 2,258 possibilities.

one else, and two internal aids, mental rehearsing and mental

retracing, than they were to use other aids.

In these past situations, more external than internal memory

aids were used, even when remembering information. Of the

1,916 memory aids mentioned for remembering to do things

in the eight situations, 1,086 (56.7%) were external aids, 647

(33.8%) were internal aids, and 183 (9.5%) were combination

or other aids. No memory aids were reported for 249 situations.

Comparable figures for the 1,993 memory aids said to be used

to help remember information were 1,073 (53.8%), 738

(37.0%), and 182 (9.1%). No memory aids were used for 265

situations.

Generality of use when remembering information versus ac-

tion. Across all 16 situations, the subjects claimed to use a total

of 3,909 memory aids, 1,916 in action situations and 1,993 in

information situations, a nonsignificant difference, x2(l> ff =

3,909) = .76. Similar results obtained when the seven most gen-

eral internal and external aids were used, x2(l, N — 3,476) =

.30 (these aids were identical to those used for the major com-

parisons in Study 1). Thus, we found no evidence to suggest

that memory aids are used across more situations involving re-

membering to do things in the past than across situations re-

quiring remembering of past information.

Generality of use of internal and external memory aids. By

contrast, the seven external memory aids were used in more

situations (2,159) than the seven most often used internal mem-

ory aids (1,317), X2(l, N= 3,476) = 101.98, p < .001. In addi-

tion, the preponderance of external over internal aids was ob-

tained for both action situations and information situations,

X2(l , JV= 3,476) = 42.09,.p< .001, X2(l,^= 3,476) = 60.89,

p < .001, respectively. McNemar's (1955) test for correlated

proportions was used for calculating the above chi squares.

Overall, then, the generality results suggest that external aids

were used in a wider range of situations than internal aids to

assist remembering to do things in the past and past informa-

tion.

Frequency of use of internal and external aids. Despite the

greater generality of use of external than internal aids, the

two types of aids were used with about equal frequency, F <

1, across both action and information situations (Table 6).

Translated into scale scores, the subjects claimed that they

used both types of aids two or fewer times in the last 2 to 4

weeks. The type of memory aid interacted with what was

being recalled, however, F(\, 12) = 7.04, MSe = .100, p =

.02: External aids (3.72) were used reliably more often than

internal aids (3.12) for remembering to do things in the past,

according to a Scheffe comparison of the individual means,

but the two types of aids did not differ significantly for recall-

ing past information (Meaen,a = 3.56; MintBnlai = 3.40). The

data suggest that external aids were used more often than

internal aids for remembering to do things in the past, but

that the two types of aids are used with roughly equal fre-


quency to access past information. These findings were not

qualified by the other variables.

Dependability. Dependability ratings for the various mem-

ory aids also appear in Table 6. As in Study 1, external aids were

rated as more dependable (4.09) than internal (3.20) aids, but

this difference was only marginally reliable, F(l, 12) = 3.96,

MS, = .225, p = .07, and none of the other main effects or inter-

actions were close to statistical significance.

Discussion

In general, the results of Study 2 suggest that external mem-

ory aids were used to remember to do things in the past across

a wider range of situations than were internal aids. External aids

also were said to be used more widely than internal aids to re-

trieve past information, an outcome that differed from the gen-

erality data of Study 1.

How might this discrepancy be resolved? Examination of the

situations suggested that those used in Study 2 implicitly or ex-

plicitly connoted more action than those of Study 1. To pursue

this possibility, we obtained ratings of the action implied or

stated in all situations used in both studies.

Twenty-four new students (12 of each sex) from the same

source rated all of the situations used in both experiments in

terms of the action that was implied, implicitly or explicitly.

Their ratings were based on a scale that ranged from absolutely

no action (1) to very obvious that action is expected to occur (7).

If the generality of use of memory aids increases with the

amount of action implied by the situations, the mean ratings

should be lowest for Study 1's situations, next for the informa-

tion situations of Study 2, and highest for the action situations

of Study 2. This is exactly the ordering we obtained: The mean

action ratings were 2.68,4.32, and 6.69, respectively, F(2,69) =

8.32, MS, = .223, p < .01. These results, then, are consistent

with the view that external memory aids are used in a wider

range of situations that imply action than in situations that im-

ply lesser amounts of action.

Study 3

Memory aids play at least two roles in recall. One role, com-

mon to all memory aids, is that of a retrieval cue. Some aids,

such as mental retracing, alphabetic searching, timers, and pho-

tographs function mainly or even exclusively as retrieval cues

(Harris, 1980). (Of course, if the subjects were told in advance

to use alphabetic cues to help them remember, this aid could

also play an encoding-receding role.) The other role involves

the encoding or receding of information. Examples are mental

rehearsals, mnemonic systems, and rhyming schemes.

In general, internal aids seem more likely than external aids

to affect the encoding or receding of information, but it is possi-

ble that the preparation of external aids also serves this func-

tion. For example, when subjects write notes to themselves,

they may refine and reorganize the items, so that the list is better

recalled than lists for which no notes were made, even when the

notes are not available at the time of recall.

In this experiment, we manipulated the instructions to use

internal and external memory aids that presumably do or do

not affect receding. The internal and external receding aids

were imagery and taking notes, and the internal and external

noncoding aids were mental retracing and a timer. Presumably,

neither of these aids would lead to receding of material. These

cues were present or absent at the time of recall. In addition,

past and future remembering were tested. We predicted that

receding would facilitate performance regardless of whether the

memory aid was internal or external, even when the memory

aid is not available at the time of test. When the aids are avail-

able at the time of test, performance should be further en-

hanced.

To test the predictions about receding, we needed a task that

could reflect changes in coding. Remembering lists of items that

could be purchased at a grocery store or at an inexpensive de-

partment store met these criteria. We predicted that the order-

ing of items at various free recall tests would be an index of

changed coding.

Method

Subjects and design. One hundred sixty new subjects from the same

source were randomly assigned to the 16 cells of the 2 (internal or exter-nal memory aid) X 2 (receding or nonrecoding assumed during train-ing) X 2 (presence or absence of aid at time of test) X 2 (past or futureremembering) design. Half of the subjects assigned to each cell were

female, and half were male. Because subjects assigned to the mentalretracing with no retrieval cue conditions for past and future remember-ing received no information at any time about using memory aids, thesesubjects constituted control groups for past and future remembering.

Materials. Each subject studied either a list of grocery-store items ora list of department-store items. The grocery list contained 16 itemscommonly purchased in a grocery store and the other list contained 16items often purchased in an inexpensive department store. These listshad been pretested and found to be equally easy to learn. The meannumber of trials to reach a criterion of one perfect recall was 2.57 forthe grocery list and 2.63 for the department store list. Both lists con-

tained items from four categories (grocery list = fruits, vegetables,meats, and dairy products; department store list = living room, kitchen,

bedroom, and cleaning supplies).Procedure. All subjects performed a series of tasks. The future-re-

membering groups knew that recall would be tested later. The randomlyordered list items were presented at a 3-s rate, and they studied eachitem according to one of four conditions. In the note-taking condition,

the subjects made notes that might help them remember on sheets ofpaper. In the timer condition, the subjects were told that a timer wouldsignal recall. In the imagery condition, subjects were to imagine walkingthrough the store, looking at the item, picking it up, and purchasing it.In the mental-retracing condition, no special instructions were given for

initial processing.The same procedures were used for the past-remembering groups,

except that they were told that the experience was a practice run tofamiliarize them with the regular procedure. All subjects learned thewords to a criterion of one perfect recall.

All subjects then participated in a 30-min filler task that involvedlearning a route through the psychology building. Next, they were testedfor free recall, with or without the assigned memory aid. For the note-taking condition, the subjects' notes either were or were not present.When the notes were present, they were turned face down at the begin-ning of the session. The students were told that they could look at thenotes if they wished to do so. The experimenter recorded if and when

they consulted their notes. The imagery subjects either were or were nottold to use their images to help them remember. The timer either did ordid not ring for the timer subjects. If it did not ring, the experimentersignaled them to begin after the same interval as that for the other sub-


jeets. The mental retracing subjects either were or were not told to use

a mental retracing strategy to help them remember the items.

Results and Discussion

Learning was rapid: The mean number of trials to reach cri-terion was 2.43 for the grocery list and 2.41 for the departmentstore list. No subject required more than three trials to meetthe criterion. The recall results are divided into two main sec-tions. The first section deals with correct recalls, and the secondconsiders evidence of possible receding of the input items.These sections do not discuss sex differences or the differencesbetween the two lists, because these variables did not yield reli-able main effects nor interactions in preliminary analyses.

Recall. We predicted that recall would be higher when cueswere present than when they were absent, both because the cuesaid receding and hence increase the likelihood of storing theitems and because the cues assist retrieval. This is exactly whathappened: The mean numbers of words correctly recalled whenmemory aids were present or absent at the time of test were14.72and 13.65, respectively,F(l, 144)= 191.28,;><.001. Allof the Ftests had the same degrees of freedom (1, 144), and themean square for the denominator of all was .242, hence onlythe values of F and their associated probabilities will be givenfor the rest of the comparisons.

Recall should be better when subjects knew that they wouldbe asked to recall the items (future-remembering tests), a condi-tion which permits the subject to prepare memory aids to agreater extent than when they were not forewarned about thememory test (past-remembering tests), and it was, Mtmm =14.61, Mpast = 13.76, F = 119.59, p < .001. In addition, it fol-lows, of course, that the use of memory aids that encourage re-coding, taking notes, and generating images, should yield higherrecall than the use of memory aids that are less likely to inducereceding, a timer or mental retracing. The data supported thisprediction: The mean recall for notes-imagery, 14.48, reliablyexceeded the mean for timer-retracing, 13.90, F = 54.72, p <.001. The final variable, external versus internal aids, was ex-pected to show a number of interactions, but there was no prin-cipled reason why it should yield a main effect. Overall, how-ever, recall was higher with external aids (notes and timer),14.28, than with internal aids (imagery, retracing), 14.10, F =5.07, p<. 05.

More interesting and important are the interactions. Perhapsthe most salient result is that the improvement in recall frompast to future remembering was greater for external than forinternal aids, F = 59.59, p < .001, and, as the left panel of Fig-ure 1 shows, this was true regardless of whether memory aidswere present or absent at the time of recall (the triple interactionwas nonsignificant, F < 1).

Additionally, recall benefited more from the likely recode-in-ducing properties of external than internal aids, as shown in theright panel of Figure 1, F = 17.48, p < .001. This result was notmodified by the presence or absence of the memory aids at thetime of recall, F < 1, although the relative recode-inducingproperties of external and internal aids interacted with the typeof recall (left panel of Figure 2), F = 6.62, p = .01. Use of anexternal memory aid such as note taking, which presumablyallows for receding of the input, yielded markedly higher re-

membering in the future, forewarned situation than other com-binations. This effect was accentuated when the memory aidswere present at recall, and the benefit was greater in future thanin past remembering and when the memory aids presumablyhad receding properties, as shown in the right panel of Figure

To recapitulate, external memory aids that are assumed tohave both receding and retrieval-cue properties yielded thehighest remembering when they were available at the time of thetest for which the subject had prepared (future remembering).These results suggest that memory aids such as note taking andimagery do indeed afford additional opportunities to encode theinput. We turn next to evidence for this claim.

The nature of the processing. If some memory aids inducegreater receding of the items than others, the memory aidsshould produce differential evidence of chunking or categoriza-tion. To assess this possibility, chunking on both the study andthe test protocols was estimated by tallying the probabilitiesthat any given item was followed by an item from the same cate-gory. This procedure was followed for each student, and thescores were then subjected to one analysis of variance for thestudy notes and to another for the recall tests.

During study, the words were clustered into categories 85%of the time. Equally straightforward was the effect of more recallclustering appearing for the two recode-inducing memory aids,taking notes and imagery, than for the two other memory aids,timer and retracing, F(\, 144)= 1 56. 56, p<. 001. The recedingvariable interacted with externality of the aids, F(\, 144) =12.53, p < .01, because more clustering occurred with notes,(mean proportion = .88) than with imagery (meanproportion = .72), but the clustering proportion did not differbetween the timer group (M = .46) and the retracing group(M = .48). No other effects were significant. The error patternsoffered further support. Almost all of the errors for the note andimagery groups were category intrusions, whereas most of theerrors for the timer and retracing groups were omissions or in-trusions unrelated to category.

One final prediction was that the failure to present an ex-pected memory aid at the time of the test would suppress per-formance compared to the control conditions. To examine thisprediction, we contrasted the mean recall for the two retracinggroups that received no instructions about using retracing/ei-ther before they saw the study list or at the time of recall, 13.55,with the means for the other groups that were not told aboutmemory aids at the time of test. The group for whom the timerwas absent had a reliably lower mean, 13.05, f(38) = 3.48, p <.0 1 , than the other groups. The means and t- values for the notes-absent and for the imagery-nonreminded groups were 14.10,;(38) = 4.3 1, and 13.90, /(38) = 2.65, respectively. Although theuse of a memory aid was not explicitly encouraged for theselatter groups, presumably they used the aids during study tofacilitate storage.

These results suggest that it pays to make notes, even whenthose notes are left behind. Of course, having the notes availableat the time of test permits perfect recall (but see later).

Others have noted that note taking facilitates encoding (e.g.,Ausubel, 1968; Barnett, Di Vesta, & Rogozinski, 198 1 ; Peper &Mayer, 1978) and "transfer-appropriate processing" (Brans-ford, Franks, Morris, & Stein, 1979; Stein, Morris, & Brans-


EXTERNAL

Q111

2IIIcc

OHIccccOO

Occi<HI

n INTERNAL

16.

15.

14.

13.

12.

TEST AIDABSENT

TEST AIDPRESENT

TEST AIDABSENT

TEST AIDPRESENT

PAST FUTURE PAST FUTURE

~

—

^

:£—

:£

NON- RECODE NON- RECODECODE RECODE

REMEMBERING ASSUMED RECODE-INDUCINGCAPABILITIES

Figure I. Mean past and future remembering following use of internal and external memory aids duringstudy when the aids were or were not present at the lime of test and when the internal and external memoryaids were or were not assumed to induce receding of the list items, Study 3.

ford, 1978). Transfer-appropriate processing refers to process-ing the material during acquisition in a manner that resemblesthe processes used during the test. For example, with suchmemory aids as note taking and imagery, similar types of orga-nization of the material during both acquisition and subsequentremembering should induce transfer-appropriate processing,which, in turn, would yield better performance than conditionsthat did not foster similar types of processing.

The external storage function of note taking does not seemto be particularly important. Although the subjects in onegroup were told that they could turn their notes face up if theywished to do so, 7 of the 10 subjects did not look at their notesat all, 2 looked at their notes after recording 15 items, and 1 didso after writing 14 items. In other words, most of the perfectrecall shown by note-taking subjects who had notes at the timeof the test occurred before the subjects consulted their notes.Moreover, reanalyses of the results taking account of only thewords recalled before the notes were consulted did not changeany of the results. Thus, these results imply that the major facili-tation of taking notes occurs before recall.

The group told simply to practice taking notes (i.e., the note-taking group assigned to past remembering) recorded reliablyfewer words (M - 12.4) than the note-taking group who ex-pected future recall (M = 16), and the former group simplyrecorded the words in the randomized order of presentation,whereas the latter group tended to categorize the words in theirnotes. The difference in recall may have reflected, in part, the

lesser coding by the former group. Similarly, Barnett et al.(1981) found that taking notes (and having experimenter-pre-pared notes) aided subsequent cued recall more than not takingor having notes, even though the notes were not available at thetime of the test, a result also found by Bretzing and Kulhavy(1981) with different materials. There are limits on the effec-tiveness of access to original materials, however, because Hayes-Roth and Walker (1979) and Waern (1981) found that subjectsdid not necessarily draw more accurate inferences when a textwas available than when it was not available. Finally, Barnett etal. noted that pretest review of the notes did not improve recallfor the note takers, further indicating that the facilitation bynotes did not stem from their availability as external storagedevices.

General Discussion

The results pose some interesting questions. For example,what are some possible reasons that people often prefer externalto internal memory aids?

External aids may be used across more situations becausethey are believed to be more dependable, accurate, and pre-ferred, and easier to use than the internal aids. Despite theseapparent virtues, however, the uses of external aids are curtailedby their dependence on external objects for their execution.This limiting characteristic of external aids suggests a reason


f!|xj TEST AIDPRESENT

QLU

aDC

OaiDCDCO0

QCC

§

<UJ

|:x:| EXTERNAL

I I INTERNAL D TEST AIDABSENT

16.

15.

14.

13.

12.

ASSUMEDNON-RECODE

ASSUMEDRECODE

ASSUMEDNON-RECODE

ASSUMEDRECODE

PAST FUTURE PAST FUTURE PAST FUTURE

REMEMBERING

PAST FUTURE

Figure 2. Mean past and future remembering when internal and external memory aids were or were notassumed to induce receding of the list and when the memory aids were or were not present at the time oftest, Study 3.

for the versatility of internal aids. Because they are mental activ-ities, internal aids presumably are available in any situation.

Harris (1980) offers another reason. He distinguishes be-tween "pure retrieval strategies" (e.g., mental retracing and al-phabetic searching) and those that involve at least some encod-ing (e.g., method of loci, first letter mnemonics, rhymes). Thus,pure retrieval strategies are preferred over other, more compli-cated and demanding strategies, an efficient approach, becauseif unaided memory is sufficient for recall, no unusual and costlyefforts would be expended. The popularity of asking someoneelse supports this argument because surely it is the easiest, leastmemory-demanding strategy of all.

Moreover, Harris's arguments could explain the relativelylow frequencies of use of some mnemonic devices, such as themethod of loci, the peg-word system, and face-name associa-tions, in Studies 1 and 2, These memory devices all require sub-stantial encoding. These arguments do not explain the appar-ently widespread use of some encoding-dependent externalaids, such as taking notes, however.

As already mentioned, external aids also function as externalmemory storage devices. Their effectiveness is not limited tothis function, however, as shown by the systematically better re-call of note takers than of other subjects, even though the notetakers rarely consulted their notes.

We would be remiss if we failed to comment on some of thehazards of research on naturalistic memory. As Harris (1980)

notes, the definition of an internal memory aid is difficult. Tech-niques that are learned and deliberately applied, such as mne-monic methods, clearly qualify as memory aids, but normalmemory processes, such as registration and encoding, do notEven this distinction is blurred by the now common demonstra-tions of preattentive mechanisms and the conscious control offeature selection for processing (e.g., Garner, 1974; Lockhead,1972; Monahan & Lockhead, 1977; Spyropoulos & Ceraso,1977; Treisman, Sykes, & Gelade, 1977; but see Jones & Mar-tin, 1980).

Neither our results nor those of others investigating memoryin naturalistic settings (Harris, 1980; Hart, 1965; Herrmann,1982; Herrmann &Neisser, 1978;Higbee, 1979; Morris, 1978;Neisser, 1982; Wilkins & Baddeley, 1978) implies that memo-rial processing differs from that induced in standard laboratorysettings.

We conclude that the role of memory aids in memory is achallenging problem. If people actually use these aids as gener-ally as they claim, then the roles of memory aids and the factorsgoverning their use must be addressed by comprehensivemodels of memory.

References

Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New\brk: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.


Baddeley, A. D., & Wilkins, A. (1984). Taking memory out of the labo-

ratory. In J. E. Harris & P. E. Morris, (Eds.), Everyday memory, ac-

tions and absentmindedness (pp. 1-17). London: Academic Press.

Barnett,J.E.,Di Vesta, F. J., & Rogozinski, J. T. (1981). What is learned

in note taking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73,181-192.

Bellezza, F. S. (1981). Mnemonic devices: Classification, characteristics,

and criteria. Review of Educational Research, 51, 247-275.

Blick, K. A., & Waite, C. J. (1971). A survey of mnemonic techniques

used by college students in free recall learning. Psychological Reports,

29, 76-78.

Bower, G. H. (1970). Imagery as a relational organizer in associative

learning. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 9, 529-533.

Bransford, J. D., Franks, J. J., Morris, C. D., & Stein, B. S. (1979).

Some general constraints on learning and memory research. In L. S.

Cermak & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), Levels of processing in human mem-

ory(pp. 331-354). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bretzing, B. H., & Kulhavy, R. W. (1981). Note-taking and passage style.

Journal of Education Psychology, 73, 242-250.

Engle, M. N. (1967). The effect of learning strategies upon free recall.

American Journal of Psychology, 80, 421-425.

Gamer, W. R. (1974). The processing of information and structure. Po-

tomac, MD: Erlbaum.

Harris, J. E. (1980). Memory aids people use: Two interview studies.

Memory & Cognition, 8, 31-38.

Harris, J. E. (1984). Remembering to do things: A forgotten topic. InJ. E. Harris & P. E. Morris (Eds.), Everyday memory, actions and

absentmindedness (pp. 71-92). London: Academic Press.

Hart, J. T. (1965). Memory and the feeling-of-knowing experience.

Journal of Educational Psychology, 56, 208-216.

Hayes-Roth, B., & Walker, C. (1979). Conngural effects in human mem-ory: The superiority of memory over external information sources as

a basis for inference verification. Cognitive Science, 3,119-140.

Herrmann, D. J. (1982). Know thy memory: The use of questionnaires

to assess and study memory. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 434-452.

Herrmann, D. J., & Neisser, U. (1978). An inventory of everyday mem-

ory experiences. In M. M. Gruneberg, P. E. Morris, & R. N. Sykes

(Eds.), Practical aspects of memory (pp. 35-51). London: Academic

Press.

Higbee, K.. L. (1979). Recent research on visual mnemonics: Historical

roots and educational fruits. Review of Educational Research, 49,

611-629.

Jones, G. V., & Martin, M. (1980). Recall cued by selectively attended

and unattended attributes. Memory & Cognition, 8, 94-98.

Kreutzer, M. A., Leonard, C., & Flavell, J. H. (1975). An interview

study of children's knowledge about memory. Monographs of the So-

ciety for Research in Child Development, 40(\, Serial No. 159).

Lockhead, G. R. (1972). Processing dimensional stimuli: A note. Psy-

chological Review, 85, 464-469.

McNemar, Q. (1955). Psychological statistics (2nd ed.). New York:

Wiley.

Meacham, J. A., ALeiman, B. (1982). Remembering to perform future

actions. In U. Neisser (Ed.), Memory observed: Remembering in natu-

ral contexts (pp. 327-336). San Francisco: Freeman.

Monahan, J. S., & Lockhead, G. R. (1977). Identification of integral

stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 106, 94-110.

Morris, P. E. (1977). Practical strategies for human learning and re-membering. In M. Howe (Ed.), Adult learning: Psychological research

and applications (pp. 125-144). London: Wiley.

Morris, P. E. (1978). Sense and nonsense in traditional mnemonics. In

M. M. Gruneberg, P. E. Morris, & R. N. Sykes (Eds.), Practical as-

pects of memory (pp. 155-163). London: Academic Press.

Neisser, U. (1982). Memory observed. San Francisco: Freeman.

Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and verbal processes. New York: Holt, Rine-hart & Winston.

Peper, R. J., & Mayer, R. E. (1978). Note-taking as a generative activity.

Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 514-522.

Perlmutter, M. (1978). What is memory aging the aging of? Develop-

mental Psychology, 14, 330-345.

Roediger, H. L. HI. (1980). The effectiveness of four mnemonics in or-

dering recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning

and Memory, 6, 558-567.

Springer, S. P., & Deutsch, G. (1981). Left brain, right brain. San Fran-

cisco: Freeman.

Spyropoulos, T., & Ceraso, J. (1977). Categorized and uncategorized

attributes as recall cues: The phenomenon of limited access. Cogni-

tive Psychology, 9, 384-402.

Stein, B. S., Morris, C. D., & Bransford, J. D. (1978). Constraints on

effective elaboration. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behav-

ior, 17,101-714.

Treisman, A. M., Sykes, M., & Gelade, G. (1977). Selective attention

and stimulus integration. In S. Domic (Ed.), Attention and perfor-

mance VI(pp. 333-361). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Waern, Y. (1981). On the relation between comprehension and memory

of a complex text. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research,

25. 21-37.

Wilkins, A. J., & Baddeley, A. D. (1978). Remembering to recall in

everyday life: An approach to absentmindedness. In M. M. Grune-

berg, P. E. Morris, & R. N. Sykes (Eds.), Practical aspects of memory

(pp. 1-8). London: Academic Press.

(Appendix follows on next page)


Appendix

The Rating Scales, Study 1

Frequency of use scale. I use(d) this method. . .1 = never

2 = up to two times in the last six months

3 — two or fewer times in the last four weeks

4 = two or fewer times in the last two weeks

5 = three to five times in the last two weeks

6 = six to ten times in the last two weeks

7 = 11 or more times in the last two weeks

Dependability scale. When I use this method it. .1 = never works

2 = works about '/4 of the time

3 = works about J/3 of the time

4 = works about '/z of the time

5 = works about % of the time

6 — works about 3A of the time

7 = always works

Ease of use scale. I find that this method is. . .

1 = extremely hard to use

2 = moderately hard to use

3 = somewhat hard to use4 = so-so

5 = somewhat easy to use6 = moderately easy to use7 = extremely easy to use

Accuracy scale. When I use this method memory is. . .1 = extremely inaccurate2 = inaccurate about V4 of the time3 = inaccurate about % of the time4 = accurate about Vi of the time; inaccurate the rest5 = accurate about % of the time6 = accurate about % of the time7 = extremely accurate

Preference scale. My most preferred memory aid in this situation is(put a 1 for the most preferred). My next most preferred is (put a 2).Continue to number the memory aids in order of preference that youuse in this situation.

Received November 15, 1985

Revision received March 10, 1986 •

Low Publication Prices for APA Members and AffiliatesKeeping You Up-to-Date

All APA members (Fellows, Members, and Associates) receive—as part of their annual dues — subscriptions to

the American Psychologist, the APA Monitor, and Psychology Today.

High School Teacher and Student Affiliates receive subscriptions to the APA Monitor and Psychology Today, andthey can subscribe to the American Psychologist at a significantly reduced rate.

In addition, all members and affiliates are eligible for savings of up to 50% on other APA journals, as well assignificant discounts on subscriptions from cooperating societies and publishers (e.g., the British PsychologicalSociety, the American Sociological Association, and Human Sciences Press).

Essential ResourcesAPA members and affiliates receive special rates for purchases of APA books, including the Publication

Manual of the APA. the Master Lectures, and APA's Guide to Research Support.

Other Benefits of MembershipMembership in APA also provides eligibility for low-cost insurance plans covering life: medical and incomeprotection: hospital indemnity; accident and travel; Keogh retirement; office overhead; and student/school,

professional, and liability.

For more information, write to American Psychological Association,

Membership Records, 1200 Seventeenth Street NW, Washington. DC 20036

external and internal memory aids: when and how often … · external and internal memory aids:...

Documents