Source: Tulving, E. (1985). Memory and consciousness. Canadian Psychology, 26(1), 1–12.
In his groundbreaking work, Endel Tulving proposes that human memory can be understood as comprising three distinct systems, each tied to a specific type of consciousness:
This tripartite model underscores how memory is not a single, monolithic faculty but rather a collection of functions, each supporting different types of learning, recall, and conscious experience. Below is an expanded discussion of each memory system and its related consciousness state.
Procedural Memory refers to the knowledge of how to perform tasks and skills—everything from riding a bicycle to playing a musical instrument or typing. Tulving describes this as the most basic form of memory, reliant on implicit learning processes that do not require conscious awareness of what is being learned.
Anoetic Consciousness is the form of consciousness associated with procedural memory. The term “anoetic” means “not knowing.” In other words, individuals can learn and deploy procedural skills without the ability to explicitly describe how they learned them or the steps involved. This “unconscious” or “non-knowing” nature contrasts with other types of consciousness that involve explicit awareness.
Example: When you first learn to ride a bike, you gradually develop the necessary motor skills. Over time, you become proficient and can cycle almost effortlessly, yet you may not be able to articulate the exact physical processes that keep the bike balanced.
Semantic Memory involves knowledge of facts, concepts, and general information about the world—for example, knowing the capital of a country or recognizing the meaning of a word. This aspect of memory does not require you to recall the specific context or personal event in which you learned the information.
Noetic Consciousness refers to the state of “knowing” or intellectual awareness. Unlike anoetic consciousness, noetic consciousness allows individuals to be aware that they know something. However, this awareness does not include a detailed recollection of personal circumstances surrounding the original learning. Essentially, you know something is true (or false) without invoking the specific episodic memory of how or when you learned it.
Example: You might know that Paris is the capital of France, but you may have no specific memory of the exact lesson or day you learned this fact. You simply “know” it.
Episodic Memory is the system that stores and retrieves personal experiences and specific events from one’s life. These memories include contextual details (e.g., time, place, associated emotions) and enable you to mentally relive past experiences.
Autonoetic Consciousness is the unique ability to not only know that an event happened, but also to mentally travel back in time to re-experience that event in one’s mind. Tulving emphasizes that this capacity is central to personal identity and subjective time awareness—it allows for “mental time travel” into both the past and the future.
Example: When you recall your last birthday celebration, you can bring to mind details like the location, who was there, what the cake looked like, and how you felt, effectively “re-living” the experience. This is episodic recall accompanied by autonoetic consciousness.
Tulving’s separation of memory into these three systems highlights how different types of knowledge are encoded, stored, and retrieved in distinct ways. Procedural knowledge can be executed without conscious reflection, semantic knowledge is retrieved as general facts, and episodic knowledge is “re-lived” with full self-awareness of the event in question.
By understanding these distinctions, researchers and clinicians can better diagnose and treat memory disorders, as well as appreciate the complexity of human cognition and the range of conscious experiences that accompany our memories.
Would you like further details on the experiments, case studies, or other points from Tulving’s paper?