{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03306878306878307, 'fraction_numerical': 0.021164021164021163, 'mean_word_length': 5.758928571428571, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Understanding the Role of Context in Memory for Maximally Counterintuitive Concepts

Previous work suggests that minimally counterintuitive concepts (i.e., those with one or two domain violations) are more memorable than concepts that are either intuitive or overly (i.e., maximally) counterintuitive (Boyer 1994; Boyer and Ramble, 2001). However, little research has specifically investigated memory for maximally counterintuitive concepts. The current study was designed to examine memory performance for maximally counterintuitive stories. The results showed that context appears to play an important role in memory for counterintuitive ideas. Such results are consistent with Upal’s (2005; 2009) context-based view of memory for counterintuitive ideas.