Cue generation and memory construction in direct and generative autobiographical memory retrieval

•We compared autobiographical memories reported to involve direct vs. generative retrieval.•Participants rated field and observer perspective, ‘tell-tale’ signs of memory construction.•We found frequent reported direct retrieval (approximately 50%), replicating recent findings.•Direct (vs. generative) retrieval led to higher field and lower observer perspective.•We suggest that direct and generative retrieval involve different content construction. Theories of autobiographical memory emphasise effortful, generative search processes in memory retrieval. However recent research suggests that memories are often retrieved directly, without effortful search. We investigated whether direct and generative retrieval differed in the characteristics of memories recalled, or only in terms of retrieval latency. Participants recalled autobiographical memories in response to cue words. For each memory, they reported whether it was retrieved directly or generatively, rated its visuo-spatial perspective, and judged its accompanying recollective experience. Our results indicated that direct retrieval was commonly reported and was faster than generative retrieval, replicating recent findings. The characteristics of directly retrieved memories differed from generatively retrieved memories: directly retrieved memories had higher field perspective ratings and lower observer perspective ratings. However, retrieval mode did not influence recollective experience. We discuss our findings in terms of cue generation and content construction, and the implication for reconstructive models of autobiographical memory.