Output buffer storage and the modality of recall

In two experiments, subjects were presented with two lists of visual items simultaneously, both of which were to be recalled. The order of recall of the lists was manipulated. In Experiment 1, subjects were required to recall one list by speaking it and the other by writing it down. Prior knowledge of the particular mode of output required for each list resulted in significantly higher levels of recall than in a condition in which the output mode for each list was not known until after presentation. This result suggests that there may be at least two modality-specific output buffers. Experiment 2 employed the same method of presentation, but spoken recall of both lists was required. In addition, the priority of the lists was manipulated, and articulatory suppression was required in half of the trials. There was an effect of priority and of recall order, together with an interaction between the two. In contrast to the results of FitzGerald and Broadbent (1985a), however, who carried out a similar experiment but with written recall, articulatory suppression significantly reduced the priority and recall order interaction. It is concluded that there is one form of output buffer storage for written or manual output and one for spoken output.     

Source‐monitoring accuracy across repeated tests following directed forgetting

The repeated recall of items from lists that participants were earlier instructed to either remember or to forget was examined in two experiments. RR participants (those instructed to remember both lists they were presented) tended to recall more List 1 items than FR participants (those instructed to forget the first list and to remember the second list). FR participants recalled more List 2 items than did RR participants, but only when directed to report those items (Experiment 1), not when directed to report items from both lists (Experiment 2). Participants experienced difficulty correctly reporting the list source of items they recalled and incorrect source recall increased across tests, showing hypermnesia. This later result underscores the need for caution when assessing the accuracy of information retrieved from multiple sources across repeated tests. Together, the data patterns provide support for the retrieval dynamics account of hypermnesia, the context‐change account of directed forgetting, and limited support for the retrieval inhibition view of directed forgetting.     

Strong items get suppressed, weak items do not: The role of item strength in output interference

An experiment is reported that examines the role of item strength in output interference. Subjects studied two types of categorized item lists: lists in which each category consisted of strong and moderate items, and lists in which each category consisted of weak and moderate items. Different degrees of item strength were accomplished by varying the items’ taxonomic frequency within a category. The subjects either recalled a category’s strong and weak items before its moderate items, or vice versa. The prior recall of the moderate items impaired the later recall of the strong items, but did not impair the later recall of the weak items. This effect of item strength indicates that output interference is caused by a process of retrieval suppression. It additionally suggests that, in order to minimize output-interference effects in recall, a list’s strong items should be recalled before its weak items.     

Conditional recall and the frequency effect in the serial recall task: an examination of item-to-item associativity

The frequency effect in short-term serial recall is influenced by the composition of lists. In pure lists, a robust advantage in the recall of high-frequency (HF) words is observed, yet in alternating mixed lists, HF and low-frequency (LF) words are recalled equally well. It has been argued that the preexisting associations between all list items determine a single, global level of supportive activation that assists item recall. Preexisting associations between items are assumed to be a function of language co-occurrence; HF?CHF associations are high, LF?CLF associations are low, and mixed associations are intermediate in activation strength. This account, however, is based on results when alternating lists with equal numbers of HF and LF words were used. It is possible that directional association between adjacent list items is responsible for the recall patterns reported. In the present experiment, the recall of three forms of mixed lists??those with equal numbers of HF and LF items and pure lists??was examined to test the extent to which item-to-item associations are present in serial recall. Furthermore, conditional probabilities were used to examine more closely the evidence for a contribution, since correct-in-position scoring may mask recall that is dependent on the recall of prior items. The results suggest that an item-to-item effect is clearly present for early but not late list items, and they implicate an additional factor, perhaps the availability of resources at output, in the recall of late list items.     

On the auditory modality superiority effect in serial recall: separating input and output factors

The modality effect in immediate recall refers to superior recall of the last few items within lists presented in spoken as opposed to printed form. The locus of this well-known effect has been unclear. N. Cowan, J. S. Saults, E. M. Elliott, and M. Moreno (2002) introduced a new method to distinguish between the effects of input serial position, output serial position, and the number of items yet to be recalled and found that large modality effects occurred only in conditions in which delay and interference at output (from items already recalled) was high. The authors replicated that finding, even when the response period included output interference acoustically similar to the spoken stimuli to be recalled. However, the authors found that output delay and interference act only by lowering the level of performance to a more sensitive range. The modality effect thus originates during encoding of the list to be recalled, not during output.     

The syllable-based word length effect and stimulus set specificity

The word length effect is the finding that a list of items that take less time to pronounce is better recalled on an immediate serial recall test than an otherwise equivalent list of items that take more time to pronounce. Contrary to the predictions of all major models of the word length effect, Hulme, Suprenant, Bireta, Stuart, and Neath (2004) found that short and long items presented within the same list were recalled equally as well as short items presented in lists of just short items. Different results were reported by Cowan, Baddeley, Elliot, and Norris (2003), who found that mixed lists were recalled worse than pure short lists, but better than pure long lists. The experiments reported here suggest that the different empirical findings are due to properties of the stimulus sets used: one stimulus set produces results that replicate Cowan et al., whereas all other sets tested so far yield results that replicate Hulme et al.     

Perceptual processing in dichotic listening.

Subjects heard two lists of 4 items each presented simultaneously to the two ears at a rate of four pairs of items per sec. A recall cue presented immediately after the test list signalled report of 4 of the 8 items. In recall by spatial location, the cue indicated whether the items on the right ear on left ear should be recalled. In recall by category name, the cue indicated the superset category (e.g., letters or words) of the items to be recalled. Recall by spatial location was not significantly different than recall by category name. This results argues against the idea of a preperceptual auditory storage that holds information along spatial channels for 1 or 2 sec. The final experiment showed that recall by spatial location is significantly better than recall by category name when the report cue is given before, not after, the list presentation. These results show that spatial location can be used to enhance semantic processing and/or memory of 1 of 2 simultaneous items, but only if the relevant location is known at the time of the item presentation.     

Semantic similarity and immediate serial recall: Is there an effect on all trials

In immediate serial recall, items are better recalled when they are all drawn from the same semantic category. This is usually accounted for by a two-stage retrieval-based framework, in which, at recall, long-term knowledge is used to reconstruct degraded phonological traces. The category shared by list items would serve as an additional retrieval cue restricting the number of recall candidates. Usually, the long-term search set is not defined, but some authors have suggested an extended search set and others a restricted set that is composed of the most recently presented items. This was tested in an experiment in which participants undertook an immediate serial recall task either alone or under articulatory suppression with either semantically similar or dissimilar lists. A trial-by-trial analysis revealed that, in both quiet and suppression conditions, items from similar lists were better recalled on all the trials, including the first one. In addition, there was no interaction between semantic similarity and trial, indicating that the effect of similarity was of similar size on all the trials. The results are best interpreted within a proposal suggesting an extended long-term search set.     

Aging and memory for words and action events: effects of item repetition and list length

We were concerned with the effects of item repetition, list length, and class of item on free recall in elderly as compared with young adults. In Experiment 1, samples of young and elderly adults recalled a list of 27 words and a list of 27 action events (minitasks performed by the subjects). Some items were presented once and some twice. Although the younger subjects showed better recall on both types of lists, the older sample benefited from item repetition as much as did the younger sample. This finding was replicated in Experiment 2. A second finding in Experiment 2 was a significant aging effect in the recall of long but not of short lists of both words and action events. The absence of an Age X Repetition Effect interaction was ascribed to the strength nature of the repetition manipulation. The age effects in the recall of the long lists were attributed to possible deficits in retrieval proficiency.     

Forgetting and redintegration of consonants and vowels in pseudoword lists

Immediate recall of phonemes was studied in a pseudoword span task. Finnish participants recalled lists of increasing length, consisting of C(consonant)V(vowel)CVCV pseudowords. The lists were made up from pools of 12 pseudowords. There were three types of lists. In the non‐redundant lists the items were unpredictable combinations of consonants and vowels. In consonant‐redundant lists, all items had the consonant frame /t/_/s/_/l/. In vowel‐redundant lists, all items had the vowel frame _/u/_/e/_/o/. Unlike redundant last syllables in a previous experiment, neither consonant nor vowel redundancy helped list recall. Instead, a harmful phonological similarity effect was apparent in the vowel‐redundant case but not the consonant‐redundant case. A phoneme‐level analysis of recall showed that consonants were recalled better in consonant‐redundant lists and vowels were recalled better in vowel‐redundant lists compared to non‐redundant lists. Vowels appeared to be more important for discrimination between items, with redundancy resulting in confusions. The consequences of phoneme‐level forgetting and redintegration for item‐ and list‐level recall are discussed.     

A developmental study of attribute encoding in free recall

In two studies, subjects from second-grade, sixth-grade, and college were presented lists of unrelated words for single-trial free recall. Embedded in the list were critical items that were either semantically or phonemically related or else were completely unrelated. The sets of related items were either massed or distributed in the longer list. For second-graders, recall of Phonemic words was better than recall of Semantic words while the reverse was true for sixth-graders. Recall of Semantic distributed words by second-graders and of Phonemic distributed words by sixth-graders did not differ from recall of unrelated words. College students recalled Phonemic and Semantic words equally well and all related words better than unrelated words. Developmental trends were seen in the salience of particular attributes and in the utilization of low salient attributes.     

Forgetting and redintegration of consonants and vowels in pseudoword lists

Immediate recall of phonemes was studied in a pseudoword span task. Finnish participants recalled lists of increasing length, consisting of C(consonant)V(vowel)CVCV pseudowords. The lists were made up from pools of 12 pseudowords. There were three types of lists. In the non-redundant lists the items were unpredictable combinations of consonants and vowels. In consonant-redundant lists, all items had the consonant frame /t/_/s/_/l/. In vowel-redundant lists, all items had the vowel frame _/u/_/e/_/o/. Unlike redundant last syllables in a previous experiment, neither consonant nor vowel redundancy helped list recall. Instead, a harmful phonological similarity effect was apparent in the vowel-redundant case but not the consonant-redundant case. A phoneme-level analysis of recall showed that consonants were recalled better in consonant-redundant lists and vowels were recalled better in vowel-redundant lists compared to non-redundant lists. Vowels appeared to be more important for discrimination between items, with redundancy resulting in confusions. The consequences of phoneme-level forgetting and redintegration for item- and list-level recall are discussed.     

The contributions of encoding,retention, and recall to the Hebb effect

The article reports an experiment testing whether the Hebb repetition effect—the gradual improvement of immediate serial recall when the same list is repeated several times—depends on overt recall of the repeated lists. Previous reports which suggest that recall is critical confound the recall manipulation with retention interval. The present experiment orthogonally varies retention interval (0 or 9 s) and whether the list is to be recalled after the retention interval. Hebb repetition learning is assessed in a final test phase. A repetition effect was obtained in all four experimental conditions; it was larger for recalled than non-recalled lists, whereas retention interval had no effect. The results show that encoding is sufficient to generate cumulative long-term learning, which is strengthened by recall. Rehearsal, if it takes place in the retention interval at all, does not have the same effect on long-term learning as overt recall.     

Dissociative effects of orthographic distinctiveness in pure and mixed lists: an item-order account

We apply the item-order theory of list composition effects in free recall to the orthographic distinctiveness effect. The item-order account assumes that orthographically distinct items advantage item-specific encoding in both mixed and pure lists, but at the expense of exploiting relational information present in the list. Experiment 1 replicated the typical free recall advantage of orthographically distinct items in mixed lists and the elimination of that advantage in pure lists. Supporting the item-order account, recognition performances indicated that orthographically distinct items received greater item-specific encoding than did orthographically common items in mixed and pure lists (Experiments 1 and 2). Furthermore, order memory (input–output correspondence and sequential contiguity effects) was evident in recall of pure unstructured common lists, but not in recall of unstructured distinct lists (Experiment 1). These combined patterns, although not anticipated by prevailing views, are consistent with an item-order account.     

The stimulus suffix effect as a memory coding phenomenon

Two short-term memory experiments examined the nature of the stimulus suffix effect on auditory linguistic and nonlinguistic stimulus lists. In Experiment 1, where subjects recalled eight-item digit lists, it was found that a silently articulated digit suffix had the same effect on recall for the last list item as a spoken digit suffix. In Experiment 2, subjects recalled lists of sounds made by inanimate objects either by listing the names of the objects or by ordering a set of drawings of the objects. Auditory suffixes, either another object sound or the spoken name of an object, produced a suffix effect under both recall conditions, but a visually presented picture also produced a suffix effect when subjects recalled using pictures. The results were most adequately explained by a levels-of-processing memory coding hypothesis.     

Age differences in collaborative memory: the role of retrieval manipulations

In two experiments, we examined age differences in collaborative inhibition (reduced recall in pairs of people, relative to pooled individuals) across repeated retrieval attempts. Younger and older adults studied categorized word lists and were then given two consecutive recall tests and a recognition test. On the first recall test, the subjects were given free-report cued recall or forced-report cued recall instructions (Experiment 1) or free recall instructions (Experiment 2) and recalled the lists either alone or in collaboration with another subject of the same age group. Free-report cued recall and free recall instructions warned the subjects not to guess, whereas forcedreport cued recall instructions required them to guess. Collaborative inhibition was obtained for both younger and older adults on initial tests of free-report cued recall, forced-report cued recall, and free recall, showing that the effect generalizes across several tests for both younger and older adults. Collaborative inhibition did not persist on subsequent individual recall or recognition tests for list items. Older adults consistently falsely recalled and recognized items more than did younger adults, as had been found in previous studies. In addition, prior collaboration may exaggerate older adults’ tendency toward higher false alarms on a subsequent recognition test, but only after a free recall test. The results provide generality to the phenomenon of collaborative inhibition and can be explained by invoking concepts of strategy disruption and source monitoring.     

Social processing improves recall performance

One recent theory (Dunbar, 2003) has highlighted the importance that processing social information might have had on the evolution of human cognition. Based on an analysis of that theory, researchers predicted that processing information in a social manner would improve recall performance in comparison with nonsocial processing. In order to test this prediction, three experiments were conducted in which participants studied 30-item word lists that were composed of common character traits (Experiment 1) or common category exem-plars (Experiments 2 and 3). Next, participants reviewed 5 list items that were purportedly recalled by either a group member or the computer. Finally, after a brief distractor task, participants were asked to complete an individual recall test for all of the items on the original 30-item list. Of primary interest was recall performance for the list items that were purportedly recalled by either another participant or the computer. We observed that recall performance for list items purportedly recalled by another participant was superior to that for items that were recalled by the computer.     

Serial position effects in recall of television commercials

Does the position of a television commercial in a block of commercials determine how well it will be recalled? The findings of naturalistic studies can be affected by uncontrolled presentation, viewing, and retention variables. In the present article, college students viewed lists of 15 commercials in a laboratory simulation and recalled the product brand names. In an immediate test, the first commercials in a list were well recalled (a primacy effect), as were the last items (a recency effect), in comparison with the recall of middle items. In an end-of-session test, the primacy effect persisted, but the recency effect disappeared. Embedding lists within a television program again produced better recall of the first items during end-of-session tests of recall and recognition. These results offered convergent validity for the naturalistic studies of commercial memory, and they supported the usefulness of combining laboratory and field methods to answer questions about everyday memory.     

The simultaneous learning effect: why does simultaneous task learning improve retention?

Despite the prevalence of encoding variables that have been shown to influence the rate of learning, very few affect the rate of forgetting of verbal material. However, when a list of words is learned simultaneously with other lists, the rate of forgetting is markedly lower than that of single-task learning. Although the magnitude of this simultaneous learning effect is large compared with typical list learning effects, it has received little empirical attention. Experiments 1 and 2 tested the hypothesis that the simultaneous learning effect is the result of a differential contribution of short-term memory during encoding. The results showed that the advantage for simultaneous task learning was obtained even under conditions that minimized the potential effects of short-term memory. Experiment 3 revealed that the simultaneous learning effect was larger when the specific items learned simultaneously were the same on each learning trial than when they were different. This finding supported a cuing explanation of the effect: the items from the other lists act as retrieval cues during delayed recall.     

The distinctiveness of the word-length effect

The authors report 2 experiments that compare the serial recall of pure lists of long words, pure lists of short words, and lists of long or short words containing just a single isolated word of a different length. In both experiments for pure lists, there was a substantial recall advantage for short words; the isolated words were recalled better than other words in the same list, and there was a reverse word-length effect: Isolated long words were recalled better than isolated short words. These results contradict models that seek to explain the word-length effect in terms of list-based accounts of rehearsal speed or in terms of item-based effects (such as difficulty of assembling items).