近年來，有關人類記憶的研究重點之一就是如何純淨的測量外顯（explicit）與 內隱（ implicit ）的記憶。 Jacoby 及其同事（ Jacoby， 1991； Jacoby， Toth， ＆ Yonelinas，1993 ）提出「歷程分離程序」（ process dissociation procedure ）合併使 用「包含」及「排除」情況以分離這兩類的記憶。歷程分離程序的基本設定曾受到一些質疑 。 Jacoby （ 1998 ）提出，此程序的使用者只要能在指導語鼓勵受試者使用記憶的「直接 提取」就可避免違反此程序的設定；若使用「衍生﹣辨認」策略，則會導致矛盾性結果。本 研究以四個實驗檢驗其基本設定，並指出「直接提取」並不一定能去除「矛盾性」結果。作 者在本研究提出一個新的分離程序 -- 「包含﹣標示」作業。此作業延續「歷程分離程序」 的理念，但僅以單一的作業即可分離出記憶的意識與自動化的作用。四個實驗均操弄訊息的 處理水準（ LoP ）並使用相同的實驗材料，唯一的差異是在測驗階段， 四實驗分別使用「 包含╱排除」作業與「包含﹣標示」業，並分別使用兩類的排除標準。結果發現，LoP 對意 識記憶的估計值有正向的影響；對自動式記憶則因作業的不同而有不同的影響。在「包含╱ 排除」作業中，LoP 效果隨排除標準的不同而有所變動；在「包含﹣標示」作業中，則產生 穩定的反向效果。本研究結果指出，歷程分離程序採取「直接提取」的策略並不能減除其基 本設定的疑點。相反的，本研究所提的「包含﹣標示」程序對記憶的分離具簡單性而且不涉 及參數相等的設定。

　　　　　Current research on human memory suggests a need to differentiate conscious from unconscious memory for a better understanding of memory. A prerequisite for this memory differentiation is to provide a pure measure of each type of memory, without being contaminated by the other. Jacoby and associates (Jacoby, 1991; Jacoby, Toth, & Yonelina, 1993) proposed the process-dissociation procedure that separates memory in a test by contrasting performance between inclusion and exclusion conditions. The procedure was developed based on assumptions that are believed to be untenable. Jacoby (1998) argued that prevention of assumption violation could be achieved by encouraging direct retrieval, whereas conditions encouraging generate-recognize strategy would cause assumption violation and paradoxical results. In the present study, we empirically examined these assumptions by contrasting performance between inclusion/exclusion and inclusion-labeling tasks and between direct-retrieval and generate-recognize strategies in four stem-completion experiments in which level of processing (LoP) was varied. Results showed that the estimate of conscious memory was better in deep than in shallow processing of words, independent of task and strategy. On the contrary, effects of LoP on the estimate of automatic memory (including unconscious memory and the baseline probability) varied with task and strategy. These results are discussed with respect to the assumptions underlying the process-dissociation procedure.