Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-b4m5d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-16T13:19:56.791Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

20 - On Cognition

Network Representation Capacity: How Social Relationships are Represented in the Human Mind

from IV - New Perspectives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 October 2021

By
Hui Sun ,
Matthew E. Brashears  and
Edward B. Smith
Edited by
Mario L. Small ,
Brea L. Perry ,
Bernice Pescosolido  and
Edward B. Smith
Mario L. Small
Affiliation:
Harvard University, Massachusetts
Brea L. Perry
Affiliation:
Indiana University, Bloomington
Bernice Pescosolido
Affiliation:
Indiana University, Bloomington
Edward B. Smith
Affiliation:
Northwestern University, Illinois
Get access

Summary

This chapter seeks to resolve the puzzle of people’s low accuracy in perceptions of local network properties versus their much higher accuracy in perceiving global network structures. We argue that this puzzle is more apparent than real because humans rely on layers of relational schemata—mental structures dictating how social agents ought to be structurally connected—to mentally organize their social contacts. In other words, differences in accuracy reflect differences in the schemata used by the individual to mentally represent social network information at varying levels (e.g., dyadic level, triadic level, and community level). Individuals vary in their schemata repertoire, and their tendencies to adopt certain schemata in a given situation or context, so the specific set of schemata that individuals activate varies in its sufficiency and appropriateness for fully representing the network structure. We define these individual differences as network representation capacities, and review and compare four prominent approaches to quantifying them: the error paradigm, the free-recall paradigm, the structural learning paradigm and the statistical learning paradigm. We conclude by inviting researchers to reconsider the relations between cognition and egocentric networks, as well as the role of network analysis in analyzing, describing and prescribing social relational behavior.

Keywords

egocentric networksinformant accuracycognitionschemanetwork representationexperimentresearch paradigm
Type
Chapter
Information
Personal Networks
Classic Readings and New Directions in Egocentric Analysis
 , pp. 555 - 572
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alba, Joseph W., and Hasher, Lynn. 1983. “Is Memory Schematic?” Psychological Bulletin” 93(2): 203.Google Scholar
Albert, Réka, and Barabási, Albert László. 2002. “Statistical Mechanics of Complex Networks.” Reviews of Modern Physics 74(1): 47–97.Google Scholar
Barabási, Albert László, and Albert, Reka. 1999. “Emergence of Scaling in Random Networks.” Science 286(5439): 509–12.Google Scholar
Frederic Charles, Bartlett. 1932. Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Berger, Jonah, and Heath, Chip. 2008. “Who Drives Divergence? Identity Signaling, Outgroup Dissimilarity, and the Abandonment of Cultural Tastes.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 95(3): 593–607.Google Scholar
Bernard, H. Russel., Killworth, Peter D, and Sailer, Lee. 1982. “Informant Accuracy in Social-Network Data V. An Experimental Attempt to Predict Actual Communication from Recall Data.” Social Science Research 11(1): 30–66.Google Scholar
Bond, Charles F., and Brockett, Daniel R.. 1987. “A Social Context-Personality Index Theory of Memory for Acquaintances.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52(6): 1110–21.Google Scholar
Bond, Charles F., Jones, Rosalind L., and Weintraub, Daniel L.. 1985. “On the Unconstrained Recall of Acquaintances: A Sampling-Traversal Model.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 49(2): 327–37.Google Scholar
Borgatti, Stephen P., Carley, Kathleen M., and Krackhardt, David. 2006. “On the Robustness of Centrality Measures under Conditions of Imperfect Data.” Social Networks 28(2): 124–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bousfield, W. A., and Sedgewick, C. H. W.. 1944. “An Analysis of Sequences of Restricted Associative Responses.” Journal of General Psychology 30(2): 149–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, Timothy F., and Oliva, Aude. 2008. “Statistical Learning Using Real-World Scenes.” Psychological Science 19(7): 678–85.Google Scholar
Brashears, Matthew E. 2013. “Humans Use Compression Heuristics to Improve the Recall of Social Networks.” Scientific Reports 3(1513): 1–7.Google Scholar
Brashears, Matthew E., and Quintane, Eric. 2015. “The Microstructures of Network Recall: How Social Networks Are Encoded and Represented in Human Memory.” Social Networks 41: 113–26.Google Scholar
Brashears, Matthew E., and Brashears, Laura Aufderheide. 2016. “The Enemy of My Friend Is Easy to Remember: Balance as a Compression Heuristic,” pp. 1–31 in Advances in Group Processes, edited by Thye, S and Lawler, E. Bingley: Emerald Insight.Google Scholar
Brashears, Matthew E., and Laura Aufderheide, Brashears, . 2020. “Compression Heuristics, Social Networks, and the Evolution of Human Intelligence.” In Network Science in Cognitive Psychology (Frontiers of Cognitive Psychology), edited by Vitevitch, Michael S. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Brewer, Devon D. 1995a. “Cognitive Indicators of Knowledge in Semantic Domains.” Journal of Quantitative Anthropology 5(2): 107–28.Google Scholar
Brewer, Devon D. 1995b. “The Social Structural Basis of the Organization of Persons in Memory.” Human Nature 6(4): 379–403.Google Scholar
Brewer, Devon D. 1997. “No Associative Biases in the First Name Cued Recall Procedure for Eliciting Personal Networks.” Social Networks 19(4): 345–53.Google Scholar
Brewer, Devon D., Rinaldi, Giovanni, Mogoutov, Andrei, and Valente, Thomas W.. 2005. “A Quantitative Review of Associative Patterns in the Recall of Persons.” Journal of Social Structure 6(1).Google Scholar
Brewer, William F., and Nakamura, Glenn V.. 1984. “The Nature and Functions of Schemas” in Handbook of Social Cognition, edited by Wyer, R. S. and Srull, T. K.. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Broido, Anna D., and Clauset, Aaron. 2019. “Scale-Free Networks Are Rare.” Nature Communications 10(1): 1017.Google Scholar
Burt, Ronald S. 2009. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Burt, Ronald S., and Bittner, Wm. M.. 1981. “A Note on Inferences Regarding Network Subgroups.” Social Networks 3(1): 71–88.Google Scholar
Carlston, Donal E., and Skowronski, John J.. 1994. “Savings in the Relearning of Trait Information as Evidence for Spontaneous Inference Generation.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 66(5): 840–56.Google Scholar
Casciaro, Tiziana, Carley, Kathleen M., and Krackhardt, David. 1999. “Positive Affectivity and Accuracy in Social Network Perception.” Motivation and Emotion 23(4): 285–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, Kyle E., Onishi, Kristine H., and Fisher, Cynthia. 2003. “Infants Learn Phonotactic Regularities from Brief Auditory Experience.” Cognition 87(2): B69–B77.Google Scholar
Chase, William G., and Simon, Herbert A.. 1973. “Perception in Chess.” Cognitive Psychology 4(1): 55–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chun, Marvin M., and Jiang, Yuhong. 1999. “Top-Down Attentional Guidance Based on Implicit Learning of Visual Covariation.” Psychological Science 10(4): 360–5.Google Scholar
Conway, Christopher M., and Christiansen, Morten H.. 2005. “Modality-Constrained Statistical Learning of Tactile, Visual, and Auditory Sequences.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 31(1): 24–39.Google Scholar
Crockett, Walter H. 1982. “Balance, Agreement, and Positivity in the Cognition of Small Social Structures.” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 15: 1–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ebel, Holger, Mielsch, Lutz-Ingo, and Bornholdt, Stefan. 2002. “Scale-Free Topology of e-Mail Networks.” Physical Review E 66(3): 035103.Google Scholar
Fiedler, Klaus. 1982. “Causal Schemata: Review and Criticism of Research on a Popular Construct.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 42(6): 1001–13.Google Scholar
Fiori, Katherine. L., Smith, Jacqui, and Antonucci, Toni C.. 2007. “Social Network Types Among Older Adults: A Multidimensional Approach.” The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences 62(6): P322–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fischer, Claude S., Jackson, Robert Max, Stueve, C. Ann, Gerson, Kathleen, McCallister Jones, Lynne, and Baldassare, Mark. 1977. Networks and Places: Social Relations in the Urban Setting. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Fiser, József, and Aslin, Richard N.. 2001. “Unsupervised Statistical Learning of Higher-Order Spatial Structures from Visual Scenes.” Psychological Science 12(6): 499–504.Google Scholar
Fiske, Alan Page. 1995. “Social Schemata for Remembering People: Relationships and Person Attributes in Free Recall of Acquaintances.” Journal of Quantitative Anthropology 5: 305–24.Google Scholar
Fodor, Jerry A., and Pylyshyn, Zenon W.. 1988. “Connectionism and Cognitive Architecture: A Critical Analysis.” Cognition 28(1–2): 3–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Freeman, Linton C. 1992. “Filling in the Blanks: A Theory of Cognitive Categories and the Structure of Social Affiliation.” Social Psychology Quarterly 55(2): 118–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, Linton C., Kimball Romney, A., and Freeman, Sue C.. 1987. “Cognitive Structure and Informant Accuracy.” American Anthropologist 89(2): 310–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gebhart, Andrea L., Aslin, Richard N., and Newport, Elissa L.. 2009. “Changing Structures in Midstream: Learning Along the Statistical Garden Path.” Cognitive Science 33(6): 1087–116.Google Scholar
Gershman, Samuel J., Pouncy, Hillard Thomas, and Gweon, Hyowon. 2017. “Learning the Structure of Social Influence.” Cognitive Science 41: 545–75.Google Scholar
Gobet, Fernand, and Simon, Herbert A.. 1996. “Recall of Rapidly Presented Random Chess Positions Is a Function of Skill.” Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 3(2):159–63.Google Scholar
Graesser, Arthur, and Mandler, George. 1978. “Limited Processing Capacity Constrains the Storage of Unrelated Sets of Words and Retrieval from Natural Categories.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 4(1): 86–100.Google Scholar
Granovetter, Mark S. 1973. “The Strength of Weak Ties.” American Journal of Sociology 78(6): 1360–80.Google Scholar
Griffiths, Thomas L., Steyvers, Mark, and Tenenbaum, Joshua B.. 2007. “Topics in Semantic Representation.” Psychological Review 114(2): 211–44.Google Scholar
Gruenewald, Paul J., and Lockhead, Gregory R.. 1980. “The Free Recall of Category Examples.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 6(3): 225–40.Google Scholar
Hamilton, David L., Leirer, Von O., and Katz, Lawrence B.. 1979. “A Clustering Analysis of Organizational Processes in Impression Formation.” Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Santa Barbara.Google Scholar
Harris, Richard J., and Monaco, Gregory E.. 1978. “Psychology of Pragmatic Implication: Information Processing between the Lines.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 107(1): 1–22.Google Scholar
Hill, R. A., and Dunbar, R. I. M.. 2003. “Social Network Size in Humans.” Human Nature 14(1): 53–72.Google Scholar
Hintzman, Douglas L. 1986. “‘Schema Abstraction’ in a Multiple-Trace Memory Model.” Psychological Review 93(4): 411–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holland, John H., Holyoak, Keith J., Nisbett, Richard E., and Thagard, Paul R.. 1989. Induction: Processes of Inference, Learning, and Discovery. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Holyoak, Keith J. 2008. “Induction as Model Selection.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 105(31): 10637–8.Google Scholar
Janicik, Gregory A., and Larrick, Richard P.. 2005. “Social Network Schemas and the Learning of Incomplete Networks.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 88(2): 348–64.Google Scholar
Karuza, Elisabeth A., Thompson-Schill, Sharon L., and Bassett, Danielle S.. 2016. “Local Patterns to Global Architectures: Influences of Network Topology on Human Learning.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 20(8): 629–40.Google Scholar
Kelley, Harold H. 1967. “Attribution Theory in Social Psychology.” In Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, vol. 15, edited by Levine, D.. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Kemp, Charles, and Tenenbaum, Joshua B.. 2008. “The Discovery of Structural Form.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 105(31): 10687–92.Google Scholar
Kidd, Celeste, Piantadosi, Steven T., and Aslin, Richard N.. 2012. “The Goldilocks Effect: Human Infants Allocate Attention to Visual Sequences That Are Neither Too Simple Nor Too Complex” edited by A. Rodriguez-Fornells. PLoS ONE 7(5): e36399.Google Scholar
Kim, Robyn, Seitz, Aaron, Feenstra, Heather, and Shams, Ladan. 2009. “Testing Assumptions of Statistical Learning: Is It Long-Term and Implicit?” Neuroscience Letters 461(2): 145–9.Google Scholar
Kimchi, Ruth. 2003. “Relative Dominance of Holistic and Component Properties in the Perceptual Organization of Visual Objects,” pp. 235–68 in Perception of Faces, Objects, and Scenes: Analytic and Holistic Processes, edited by Peterson, M. A. and Rhodes., G. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kirkham, Natasha Z., Slemmer, Jonathan A., and Johnson, Scott P.. 2002. “Visual Statistical Learning in Infancy: Evidence for a Domain General Learning Mechanism.” Cognition 83(2): B35–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knox, Hannah, Savage, Mike, and Harvey, Penny. 2006. “Social Networks and the Study of Relations: Networks as Method, Metaphor and Form.” Economy and Society 35(1): 113–40.Google Scholar
Krackhardt, David. 1987. “Cognitive Social Structures.” Social Networks 9: 109–34.Google Scholar
Krackhardt, David. 1996. “Comment on Burt and Knez’s Third-Party Effects on Trust.” Rationality and Society 8(1): 111–20.Google Scholar
Krackhardt, David. 2014. “A Preliminary Look at Accuracy in Egonets.” Research in the Sociology of Organizations 40(2014): 277–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krackhardt, David, and Kilduff, Martin. 1999. “Whether Close or Far: Social Distance Effects on Perceived Balance in Friendship Networks.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 76(5): 770–82.Google Scholar
Kumbasar, , Ece, A. Rommey, Kimball, and Batchelder, William H.. 1994. “Systematic Biases in Social Perception.” American Journal of Sociology 100(2): 477–505.Google Scholar
Lansu, Tessa A. M., Cillessen, Antonius H. N, and Karremans, Johan C. 2014. “Adolescents’ Selective Visual Attention for High-Status Peers: The Role of Perceiver Status and Gender.” Child Development 85(2): 421–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lin, Nan. 1999. “Social Networks and Status Attainment.” Annual Review of Sociology 25(1): 467–87.Google Scholar
Markman, Arthur B. 1999. Knowledge Representation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Google Scholar
Medin, Douglas L., Lynch, Elizabeth B., Coley, John D., and Atran, Scott. 1997. “Categorization and Reasoning among Tree Experts: Do All Roads Lead to Rome?” Cognitive Psychology 32(1): 49–96.Google Scholar
Messinger, A., Squire, L. R., Zola, S. M., and Albright, T. D.. 2001. “Neuronal Representations of Stimulus Associations Develop in the Temporal Lobe during Learning.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 98(21): 12239–44.Google Scholar
Minsky, Marvin. 1975. “A Framework for Representing Knowledge.” in The Psychology of Computer Vision, edited by Winston., P. H. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Newell, Allen, and Simon, Herbert Alexander. 1972. Human Problem Solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Newman, M. E. J., and Park, Juyong. 2003. “Why Social Networks Are Different from Other Types of Networks.” Physical Review E 68(3): 036122.Google Scholar
Onnis, Luca, Waterfall, Heidi R., and Edelman, Shimon. 2008. “Learn Locally, Act Globally: Learning Language from Variation Set Cues.” Cognition 109(3): 423–30.Google Scholar
Osada, Takahiro, Adachi, Yusuke, Kimura, Hiroko M., and Miyashita, Yasushi. 2008. “Towards Understanding of the Cortical Network Underlying Associative Memory.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 363(1500): 2187–99.Google Scholar
Paivio, Allan. 1969. “Mental Imagery in Associative Learning and Memory.” Psychological Review 76(3): 241–63.Google Scholar
Parkinson, Carolyn, Kleinbaum, Adam M., and Wheatley, Thalia. 2017. “Spontaneous Neural Encoding of Social Network Position.” Nature Human Behaviour 1(5): 72.Google Scholar
Pescosolido, Bernice A., and Wright, Eric R.. 2004. “The View from Two Worlds: The Convergence of Social Network Reports between Mental Health Clients and Their Ties.” Social Science and Medicine 58(9): 1795–806.Google Scholar
Prentice, Deborah A. 1990. “Familiarity and Differences in Self- and Other-Representations.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 59(3): 369–83.Google Scholar
Roenker, Daniel L., Thompson, Charles P., and Brown, Sam C.. 1971. “Comparison of Measures for the Estimation of Clustering in Free Recall.” Psychological Bulletin 76(1): 45–8.Google Scholar
Rumelhart, David E., and McClelland, James L.. 1986. Parallel Distributed Processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rumelhart, David E., and Ortony, Andrew. 1978. “The Representation of Knowledge in Memory,” pp. 99–135 in Schooling and the Acquisition of Knowledge, edited by Anderson, R. C., Spiro, R. J., and Montague, W. E.. Oxford: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Saariluoma, Pertti. 1989. “Chess Players’ Recall of Auditorily Presented Chess Positions.” European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 1(4): 309–20.Google Scholar
Saffran, Jenny R., Aslin, Richard N., and Newport, Elissa L.. 1996. “Statistical Learning by 8-Month-Old Infants.” Science 274(5294): 1926–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Saffran, Jenny R., and Wilson, Diana P.. 2003. “From Syllables to Syntax: Multilevel Statistical Learning by 12‐Month‐Old Infants.” Infancy 4(2): 273–84.Google Scholar
Schank, Roger C., and Abelson, Robert P.. 1977. Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding: An Inquiry into Human Knowledge Structures. Oxford: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Schapiro, Anna C., and Turk-Browne, Nicholas B.. 2015. “Statistical Learning,” pp. 501–6 in Brain Mapping: An Encyclopedic Reference, edited by Toga, A. W.. Cambridge, MA: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Schapiro, Anna C., Gregory, Emma, Landau, Barbara, McCloskey, Michael, and Turk-Browne, Nicholas B.. 2014. “The Necessity of the Medial Temporal Lobe for Statistical Learning.” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 26(8): 1736–47.Google Scholar
Schapiro, Anna C., Rogers, Timothy T., Cordova, Natalia I., Turk-Browne, Nicholas B., and Botvinick, Matthew M.. 2013. “Neural Representations of Events Arise from Temporal Community Structure.” Nature Neuroscience 16(4): 486–92.Google Scholar
John, Scott. 1988. “Social Network Analysis.” Sociology 22(1): 109–27.Google Scholar
Smolensky, Paul. 1988. “On the Proper Treatment of Connectionism.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 11(1): 1–23.Google Scholar
De Soto, Clinton B. 1960. “Learning a Social Structure.” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 60(3): 417–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Soto, Clinton B., Henley, Nancy M., and London, Marvin. 1968. “Balance and the Grouping Schema.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 8(1, Pt.1): 1–7.Google Scholar
Sulin, Rebecca A., and James Dooling, D. 1974. “Intrusion of a Thematic Idea in Retention of Prose.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 103(2): 255–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sun, Hui, and Smith, Edward B.. 2018. “Cognitive Search and Social Networks.” Academy of Management Conference, Chicago, United States.Google Scholar
Tang, Jian, Meng, Qu, Wang, Mingzhe, Zhang, Ming, Yan, Jun, and Mei, Qiaozhu. 2015. “LINE: Large-Scale Information Network Embedding,” pp. 1067–77 in the Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on the World Wide Web.Google Scholar
Tavares, Rita Morais, Mendelsohn, Avi, Grossman, Yael, Williams, Christian Hamilton, Shapiro, Matthew, Trope, Yaacov, and Schiller, Daniela. 2015. “A Map for Social Navigation in the Human Brain.” Neuron 87(1): 231–43.Google Scholar
Todorov, Alexander, and Uleman, James S.. 2003. “The Efficiency of Binding Spontaneous Trait Inferences to Actors’ Faces.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 39(6): 549–62.Google Scholar
Tompson, Steven, Kahn, Ari, Falk, Emily, Vettel, Jean, and Bassett, Danielle. 2019. “Individual Differences in Learning Social and Non-Social Network Structures.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 45(2): 253–71.Google Scholar
Treisman, Anne. 1986. “Features and Objects in Visual Processing.” Scientific American 255(5): 114–25.Google Scholar
Uleman, James S., Adil Saribay, S., and Gonzalez, Celia M.. 2007. “Spontaneous Inferences, Implicit Impressions, and Implicit Theories.” Annual Review of Psychology 59: 329–60.Google Scholar
Vapnik, Vladimir N. 1999. An Overview of Statistical Learning Theory. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks 10(5): 988–99.Google Scholar
Vaughn, Brian E., and Waters, Everett. 1981. “Attention Structure, Sociometric Status, and Dominance: Interrelations, Behavioral Correlates, and Relationships to Social Competence.” Developmental Psychology 17(3): 275–88.Google Scholar
Wagemans, Johan, Feldman, Jacob, Gepshtein, Sergei, Ruth Kimchi, James R. Pomerantz, Peter A. van der Helm, and Cees van Leeuwen. 2012. “A Century of Gestalt Psychology in Visual Perception: II. Conceptual and Theoretical Foundations.” Psychological Bulletin 138(6): 1218–52.Google Scholar
Watts, Duncan J., and Strogatz, Steven H.. 1998. “Collective Dynamics of ‘Small-World’ Networks.” Nature 393(6684): 440–2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Winkler-Rhoades, Nathan, Douglas Medin, Sandra R. Waxman, Jennie Woodring, and Ross, Norbert O.. 2010. “Naming the Animals That Come to Mind: Effects of Culture and Experience on Category Fluency.” Journal of Cognition and Culture 10(1–2): 205–20.Google Scholar
Wood, Gordon. 1978. “The Knew-It-All-Along Effect.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 4(2): 345–53.Google Scholar
Yonelinas, Andrew P. 1994. “Receiver-Operating Characteristics in Recognition Memory: Evidence for a Dual-Process Model.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 20(6): 1341–54.Google Scholar
Yonelinas, Andrew P. 2002. “The Nature of Recollection and Familiarity: A Review of 30 Years of Research.” Journal of Memory and Language 46: 441–517.Google Scholar
Zerubavel, Noam, Bearman, Peter S., Weber, Jochen, and Ochsner, Kevin N.. 2015. “Neural Mechanisms Tracking Popularity in Real-World Social Networks.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 112(49): 15072–7.Google Scholar
Zhou, W. X., Sornette, D., Hill, R. A., and Dunbar, R. I. M.. 2005. “Discrete Hierarchical Organization of Social Group Sizes.” Proceedings. Biological Sciences 272(1561): 439–44.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×