Episodic Memory
Word Values Task
Also called: value-directed remembering, value-directed recall, memory selectivity task
Measure how recall favors high-value words: participants study English words worth different points, then type the words they remember.
5-7 minUntimed
Free to start: 10 free participants per account, then $0.99 per participant for academic research, or any yearly plan. Try it here first, with no account.
- Papers, 2021 to 2025
- 33
- Evidence grade
- D
- Registered clinical studies
- 0
What it measures
Measures recall by value and how strongly recall favors high-value words. Participants study English words worth different points, then type the words they remember.
Constructs
- Value-directed remembering
- Memory selectivity
- Verbal recall
- Strategic learning
Research uses
- Memory and motivation research
- Aging research
- Studies of selective learning
How the paradigm works
The Word Values Task measures how people prioritize information when remembering it. Each English word is paired with an arbitrary value from 1 to 12. Participants try to earn as many points as they can by recalling words after each list, then see their points before starting another list. Word order and values are assigned independently from a recorded session seed.
More about the paradigm
The main score is the selectivity index described by Castel and colleagues (2002): points above chance, divided by the best possible points above chance for the same number of words recalled. An index of 1 means only the highest-value words were recalled; 0 means no preference for value; -1 means the lowest values were recalled. Lists with zero or perfect recall have no defined index, so their recall and points are reported separately. Recall by each value and by low, medium and high values shows the pattern behind the index.
Scores
- Selectivity Indexscore
- Mean defined list index: (points minus chance points) / (ideal points minus chance points), conditional on number recalled.
- 1 favors the highest values, 0 shows no value preference, -1 favors the lowest
- Points Earnedpoints
- Sum of the values of unique recalled test words.
- Higher means more points earned
- Words Recalled, Proportion%
- Share of words recalled from lists with a completed recall.
- Higher means more words recalled
- High-Value Recall%
- Recall of words worth 9 to 12 points.
- Higher means more words recalled
- Medium-Value Recall%
- Recall of words worth 5 to 8 points.
- Higher means more words recalled
- Low-Value Recall%
- Recall of words worth 1 to 4 points.
- Higher means more words recalled
- Recall at Value 1%
- Share of words worth 1 point recalled.
- Context for value selectivity
- Recall at Value 2%
- Share of words worth 2 points recalled.
- Context for value selectivity
- Recall at Value 3%
- Share of words worth 3 points recalled.
- Context for value selectivity
- Recall at Value 4%
- Share of words worth 4 points recalled.
- Context for value selectivity
- Recall at Value 5%
- Share of words worth 5 points recalled.
- Context for value selectivity
- Recall at Value 6%
- Share of words worth 6 points recalled.
- Context for value selectivity
- Recall at Value 7%
- Share of words worth 7 points recalled.
- Context for value selectivity
- Recall at Value 8%
- Share of words worth 8 points recalled.
- Context for value selectivity
- Recall at Value 9%
- Share of words worth 9 points recalled.
- Context for value selectivity
- Recall at Value 10%
- Share of words worth 10 points recalled.
- Context for value selectivity
- Recall at Value 11%
- Share of words worth 11 points recalled.
- Context for value selectivity
- Recall at Value 12%
- Share of words worth 12 points recalled.
- Context for value selectivity
- Prior-List Intrusionscount
- Words from practice or earlier lists typed again.
- Context for recall
- Other Intrusionscount
- Words outside the current and earlier lists, including unstudied pool words.
- Context for recall
- Repeatscount
- Matched words typed again within a recall.
- Context for recall
- Entries Typedcount
- Entries classified across test recalls.
- Context for recall
- Words Recalledcount
- Unique test words recalled in their own list.
- Higher means more words recalled
- Lists Completedcount
- Distinct test lists recalled.
- Compare with lists planned
- Lists Plannedcount
- Number of test lists set for this session.
- Context for recall
- Lists with Selectivitycount
- Lists recalling at least one but fewer than all words.
- Lists contributing to the mean index
- Lists with No Recallcount
- Completed lists with no target recalled.
- Context for selectivity
- Lists with All Words Recalledcount
- Completed lists with every target recalled.
- Context for selectivity
- Paste Attemptscount
- Blocked paste attempts.
- Should be 0
- Non-English Sessionflag
- 1 when English words were shown with non-English instructions.
- Review the English vocabulary requirement
Use and evidence
33 papers from 2021 to 2025 name this task in their title or abstract, up 136% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 426 of 582 test families in our census. See the counts for every test.
Show the numbers
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 10 |
| 2024 | 1 |
| 2023 | 12 |
| 2022 | 5 |
| 2021 | 5 |
| 2020 | 0 |
| 2019 | 6 |
| 2018 | 6 |
| 2017 | 1 |
| 2016 | 1 |
| 2015 | 5 |
| 2014 | 2 |
| 2013 | 5 |
| 2012 | 5 |
| 2011 | 2 |
| 2010 | 1 |
| 2009 | 1 |
| 2008 | 0 |
| 2007 | 1 |
| 2006 | 0 |
| 2005 | 0 |
| 2004 | 0 |
| 2003 | 0 |
| 2002 | 0 |
| 2001 | 0 |
| 2000 | 0 |
Use grade D
30 to 99 papers from 2021 to 2025.
Evidence grade D
Little published measurement evidence found.
- Papers on test-retest reliability
- 0
- Papers on reliability or validity
- 1
- Registered clinical studies using it as an outcome
- 0
Measured on ConductCognition
Pooled across the studies that feed our platform norms, by device group. A figure needs 50 or more people.
No pooled figure yet.
How the grades work
Use: A is 1,000 or more papers from 2021 to 2025, B 300 to 999, C 100 to 299, D 30 to 99 and E fewer than 30. Evidence: A means at least 25 papers report its test-retest reliability and at least 25 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome; B, at least 8 test-retest papers, and either 5 registered clinical studies or 150 reliability or validity papers; C, at least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies; D, little published measurement evidence found. The counts measure use. They include every paper that names the task in its title or abstract. Grades describe the published research on this task, not ConductCognition's version of it.
Source: ConductCognition test census 0.39.0, counted 8 November 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Task design
The trial sequence as the test runs in ConductCognition.
- Lists
- 4 lists of 12 English words (standard; 2 to 6), drawn without replacement from 72 original nouns. Six separate practice words come first.
- Values
- Each test list has each value from 1 to 12 once. The session seed shuffles word order and independently assigns values. Recalled words earn their points once; points have no cash value.
- Study
- Word and value appear together for 2,000 ms (standard; 1,000 to 4,000), followed by a 250 ms blank, on animation frames.
- Recall
- Up to 45 seconds per list (standard; 20 to 90), with a visible timer and Done button. Type the English words without their numbers. Case, accents, punctuation, articles and listed plurals or spellings are accepted; other spelling errors are not corrected.
- Feedback
- The words recalled and points earned appear after each list. Practice uses values 1 to 6 and is excluded from the final total.
- Selectivity
- For k words recalled, selectivity is (earned points minus 6.5 times k) divided by (the sum of the k highest values minus 6.5 times k). The primary score averages defined list indices. Zero-word and all-word lists have undefined selectivity; their counts, recall and points are still reported.
- Other scores
- Recall for each value, low (1 to 4), medium (5 to 8) and high (9 to 12) recall, overall recall, points, prior-list intrusions, other intrusions and repeats.
This shorter typed version uses original English nouns, translated instructions and longer recall time than the original spoken task. Common words overlap other library tasks; separate sessions help avoid prior exposure. No published norms are applied.
Quality checks
Each session is marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason, before you see its scores.
Scored rows: word_values_recall from the run with most recall rows, practice excluded. Typed recall has no chance level. Zero recall, incomplete runs, blocked paste and a non-English session are flagged. A hidden tab withholds the percentile.
Why these rules
Recall can be zero in an engaged run. Selectivity is undefined when no words or all words are recalled, so recall and points remain available separately. The word lists are English. A session run in another language shows English words to a participant who may not read English fluently, so it is flagged for review. A hidden tab lets the study, delay or response timers run without the participant, so a percentile is withheld after one.
No percentile. Scores and quality flags only.
Running this test
Settings you can change
| Setting | Standard | Allowed |
|---|---|---|
| Lists | 4 | 2 to 6 |
| Time per word (ms) | 2,000 | 1,000 to 4,000 |
| Recall time (seconds) | 45 | 20 to 90 |
Yearly plans can change settings within these limits. Free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Need a setting this test does not have?
Devices and languages
- Untimed test: runs on desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. Participant devices
- Instructions and screens: English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese. Words and sentences: English.
- Available on: Every plan, including the free plan.
- No percentile. Scores and quality flags only. How norms work
- Recruiting online? See the setup guides for Prolific, Sona Systems, CloudResearch Connect and Qualtrics.
Cite and describe
Participants completed the Word Values Task in a web browser (ConductCognition task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0; Castel et al., 2002), with the standard settings (lists: 4; time per word (ms): 2,000; recall time (seconds): 45). The main score was selectivity index (mean defined list index: (points minus chance points) / (ideal points minus chance points), conditional on number recalled).
ConductCognition versions: task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0. Every export records the versions each session used, for a methods section.
- Castel, A. D., Benjamin, A. S., Craik, F. I. M., & Watkins, M. J. (2002). The effects of aging on selectivity and control in short-term recall. Memory & Cognition, 30(7), 1078-1085. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194325Unique point values 1 to 12, feedback after each list and the selectivity index conditional on recall count.
Source papers
- Castel, A. D., Benjamin, A. S., Craik, F. I. M., & Watkins, M. J. (2002). The effects of aging on selectivity and control in short-term recall. Memory & Cognition, 30(7), 1078-1085.Paradigm source
Questions
How long does the Word Values Task take?
About 5 to 7 minutes, as listed in the test library.
What device does a participant need?
Untimed test: runs on desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. The browser must be Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.
What scores does it produce?
Selectivity Index, Points Earned, Words Recalled, Proportion, High-Value Recall, Medium-Value Recall, Low-Value Recall, Recall at Value 1, Recall at Value 2, Recall at Value 3, Recall at Value 4, Recall at Value 5, Recall at Value 6, Recall at Value 7, Recall at Value 8, Recall at Value 9, Recall at Value 10, Recall at Value 11, Recall at Value 12, Prior-List Intrusions, Other Intrusions, Repeats, Entries Typed, Words Recalled, Lists Completed, Lists Planned, Lists with Selectivity, Lists with No Recall, Lists with All Words Recalled, Paste Attempts and Non-English Session. Each session is also marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason.
How widely is the Word Values Task used in research?
33 papers from 2021 to 2025 name it in their title or abstract, up 136% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 426 of 582 test families in the ConductCognition test census (use grade D). Source: ConductCognition test census 0.39.0, counted 8 November 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
How much reliability evidence does the Word Values Task have?
In the published research, 0 papers report its test-retest reliability and 0 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome (evidence grade D in the ConductCognition test census).
Does it report a percentile?
No. Scores and quality flags only.
Which settings can a researcher change?
Lists (2 to 6), time per word (ms) (1,000 to 4,000) and recall time (seconds) (20 to 90). Settings can be changed on yearly plans; free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Which languages can participants use?
The instructions and screens are in English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese. The words and sentences stay in English, so sessions in other languages are flagged for review. English is on every plan, and the other languages come with yearly plans. Have a native speaker read the machine-translated text before launch.
Is this a clinical test?
No. ConductCognition is for research use only. It runs, scores and exports the test; clinical interpretation is outside the platform.
Every test: the full test list.
Run this test in your next study
Start free with 10 free participants on any test, then use participant credits or a yearly plan.