Abstract
This paper provides support for the notion that images, once formed, are a distinct form of internal representation, processed differently than other forms of internal representation. In two experiments, subjects decided as quickly as possible whether or not named animals had given properties. When imagery was not used, people verified properties more quickly in accordance with how strongly associated the property was with the animal in question. When images of the whole animal were consulted, in contrast, subjects were faster in accordance with increasing size of the property, and not with increasing association strength. However, if subjects imaged only the local region where a property ought to be found, and did not consult an image of the whole animal, the size of a property no longer influenced verification time. These results and their implications for the debate over imagery vs. propositional representation were discussed.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Reference Notes
Winograd. T.Frame representations and the declarative/ procedural controversy. Paper presented at the Carbonell Memorial Conference, Pajaro Dunes, California. May 1974.
References
Anderson, J. R.. &Bower, G. H.Human assoctative memory. New York: Wiley, 1973.
Collins, A. M., &Quillian, R. M. Retrieval time from semantic memory.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1969,8, 240–247.
Conrad, C. Cognitive economy in semantic memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1972,92, 149–154.
Jorgensen, C. C., &Kintsch, W. The role of imagery in the evaluation of sentences.Cogmtive Psychology, 1973,4, 110–116.
Kosslyn, S. M. Constructing visual images. PhD dissertation, Stanford University, 1974.
Kosslvn, S. M. Information representation in visual images.Cognitive Psychology, 1975,7, 341–370.
Loftus, E. F., &Suppes, P. Structural variables that determine the speed of retrieving words from long-term memory.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1972,11, 770–777.
Nelson, K. E., &Kosslvn, S. M. Semantic retrieval in children and adults.Developmental Psychology, 1975,11, 807–813.
Paivio, A.Imagery and verbal processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart &Winston, 1971.
Putnam, M. H. Reductionism and the nature of psychology.Cognition, 1973,2, 131–140.
Pylyshyn, Z. W. What the mind’s eye tells the mind’s brain: A critique of mental imagery.Psychological Bulletin, 1973,80, 1–24.
Schaeffer, B., &Wallace, R. Semantic similarity and the comparison of word meanings.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1909,82, 343–346.
Smith, E. E., Shoben, E. J., &Ripsm, L. J. Structure and process in semantic memory: A feature model for semantic decisions.Psychological Review, 1974,81, 214–241.
Welford, A. T.Fundamentals of skill. London: Methuen, 1968.
Wilkins, A. J. Categorization time and category size.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1971,10, 382–385.
Winer, B. J.Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1971.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
some of this work was supported by Biomedical Sciences Grant 5 S05 RR07041-09 awarded to Johns Hopkins University by the Division of Research Resources, DHEW.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kosslyn, S.M. Can imagery be distinguished from other forms of internal representation? Evidence from studies of information retrieval times. Memory & Cognition 4, 291–297 (1976). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03213178
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03213178