The memorial structure of organized sequences

Subjects were asked to memorize a sequence of nine consonants which were grouped into three groups of three letters each (e.g., SBJ FQL ZNG). After learning the sequence, they were presented with single letters, letter pairs, or letter triples and asked to indicate if the probe item appeared in the memorized sequence. The latency results suggest that subjects engage in a linear self-terminating memory search in which the items from one chunk are retrieved from memory as the items from the immediately preceding chunk are being scanned. When the probe consisted of more than one item, the subjects were slowed in their comparison if the letters came from different chunks (e.g., JF vs. FQ in the above illustration), and the number of letters in the probe also influenced the reaction time. Neither of those effects were obtained if all the letters in the probe came from the same chunk, and that would seem to suggest that the probe items from the same chunk were compared in parallel to the letters in the memory item, while items from different chunks were compared serial.     

Ordering and reordering in the auditory and visual modalities

This study investigates the hypothesis that the modality effect (i.e., the often-found recall advantage of the last few items presented in the auditory- rather than visual-input modality) is attributable to a directional auditory trace. Such a directional trace should help performance of forward item-to-item recall, but should hurt performance if mental reordering is required. However, it was found in our Experiment 1 that mental item-to-item reordering of the materials did not affect the modality effect. In Experiment 2, strict control was exercised over the order of recall of chunks of items, as well as over the order of recall within chunks. It was found that the item-to-item reordering of the materials had little effect on the modality effect. However, the larger scale order of recall of the chunks had a large effect on the modality effect. If recall was in a forward order (i.e., first chunk, second chunk, third chunk), there was a dramatic superiority of the auditory materials on the last chunk. If the recall order was backward (third chunk, second chunk, first chunk), the modality effect was inconsequential. These results suggest that the modality effect is related to access to large memorial units rather than to item-to-item associations.     

Familiarity supports associative recognition memory for face stimuli that can be unitised: Evidence from receiver operating characteristics

According to dual-process models, associative recognition memory mainly relies on recollection without benefiting from familiarity. This study investigates the circumstances under which familiarity may support associative recognition judgements by comparing recognition memory for arbitrarily paired items (i.e., pairs of face stimuli depicting two different persons; interitem associations) with recognition memory for pairs of items that are highly overlapping and can be unitised into a coherent whole (i.e., pairs of physically different but very similar face stimuli depicting the same person; intraitem associations). Estimates of familiarity and recollection were derived from receiver operating characteristics. Consistent with the hypothesis that familiarity is able to support associative recognition memory, but only when the to-be-associated stimuli can be unitised, results from two experiments revealed higher familiarity estimates for intra- compared to interitem associations. By contrast, recollection for recombined pairs was higher for inter- compared to intraitem associations. We propose a hypothetical model on how intraitem associations may benefit from familiarity.     

Evidence that thesame-different disparity in letter matching is not attributable to response bias

When pairs of letters or letter strings are judged assame ordifferent, correctsame responses are usually faster than correctdifferent responses. Recently, Ratcliff and Hacker (1981, 1982) have argued that thissame-different disparity is likely attributable solely to a bias to respondsame. The present article reports an experiment in which the relative bias to respondsame ordifferent was varied for matches of single-letter pairs. Bias was manipulated by having 80, 60, 40, or 20 pairs in a block of 100 besame, with the remainder beingdifferent. For both sequential and simultaneous presentation of the letters,same reaction times had an overall advantage overdifferent reaction times that could not be attributed to response bias. Moreover, consistent with Proctor’s (1981) facilitation principle, this reaction time disparity was greater with sequential presentation than with simultaneous presentation. The larger reaction time advantage forsame pairs with sequential presentation was obtained without an increase in the relative number of false-same responses, supporting the view that the facilitation is attributable to changes in sensitivity and not to changes in encoding criteria.     

Infants hierarchically organize memory representations

Throughout development, working memory is subject to capacity limits that severely constrain short‐term storage. However, adults can massively expand the total amount of remembered information by grouping items into chunks. Although infants also have been shown to chunk objects in memory, little is known regarding the limits of this ability. In particular, it remains unknown whether infants can create more complex memory hierarchies, binding representations of chunks into still larger chunks in recursive fashion. Here we tested the limits of early chunking, first measuring the number of items infants can bind into a single chunk and the number of chunks infants can maintain concurrently, and then, critically, whether infants can embed chunked representations into larger units. We tested 14‐month‐old infants' memory for hidden objects using a manual search task in which we manipulated memory load (the number of objects infants saw hidden) and the chunking cues provided. We found that infants are limited in the number of items they can chunk and in the number of chunks they can remember. However, we also found that infants can bind representations of chunks into ‘superchunks’. These results suggest that hierarchically organizing information strongly affects working memory, starting in infancy.     

What’s magic about magic numbers? Chunking and data compression in short-term memory

Short term memory is famously limited in capacity to Miller's (1956) magic number 7±2-or, in many more recent studies, about 4±1 "chunks" of information. But the definition of "chunk" in this context has never been clear, referring only to a set of items that are treated collectively as a single unit. We propose a new more quantitatively precise conception of chunk derived from the notion of Kolmogorov complexity and compressibility: a chunk is a unit in a maximally compressed code. We present a series of experiments in which we manipulated the compressibility of stimulus sequences by introducing sequential patterns of variable length. Our subjects' measured digit span (raw short term memory capacity) consistently depended on the length of the pattern after compression, that is, the number of distinct sequences it contained. The true limit appears to be about 3 or 4 distinct chunks, consistent with many modern studies, but also equivalent to about 7 uncompressed items of typical compressibility, consistent with Miller's famous magical number.     

Causal Networks or Causal Islands? The Representation of Mechanisms and the Transitivity of Causal Judgment

Knowledge of mechanisms is critical for causal reasoning. We contrasted two possible organizations of causal knowledge—an interconnected causal network, where events are causally connected without any boundaries delineating discrete mechanisms; or a set of disparate mechanisms—causal islands—such that events in different mechanisms are not thought to be related even when they belong to the same causal chain. To distinguish these possibilities, we tested whether people make transitive judgments about causal chains by inferring, given A causes B and B causes C, that A causes C. Specifically, causal chains schematized as one chunk or mechanism in semantic memory (e.g., exercising, becoming thirsty, drinking water) led to transitive causal judgments. On the other hand, chains schematized as multiple chunks (e.g., having sex, becoming pregnant, becoming nauseous) led to intransitive judgments despite strong intermediate links ((Experiments 1–3). Normative accounts of causal intransitivity could not explain these intransitive judgments (Experiments 4 and 5).     

Response competition effects insame-different judgments

An account ofsame-different discriminations that is based upon a continuous-flow model of visual information processing (C. W. Eriksen & Schultz, 1979) and response competition and inhibition between the responses by which the subject signifies his judgment is presented. We show that a response signifyingsame will on the average be executed faster due to less priming or incipient activation of the competing response,different. In the experiment, the subjects matched letters on the basis of physical identity. The degree of priming ofdifferent responses on same trials and ofsame responses ondifferent trials was manipulated by an extraneous noise letter placed in the display. Latency for judgments onsame trials increased as the feature overlap of noise and target letters decreased. Latencies were shorter ondifferent trials when the noise letter was dissimilar to either target letter than when the noise letter was the same as one of the targets. These results were consistent with the response-competition interpretation.     

Learning and transfer of relational matching-to-sample by pigeons

We trained pigeons on a relational matching-to-sample task to see whether a nonprimate species can discriminate higher-order “relations between relations.” We required the birds to relationally match arrays of 16 items that were chosen from five nonoverlapping sets of 20 colored computer icons. On each trial, randomly selected icons from one set were placed into a 4×4 grid to form a sample; onsame trials, all 16 icons were identical to each other, whereas ondifferent trials, all 16 icons were different from each other. After 10-20 pecks, 16-itemsame anddifferent testing arrays were presented that were created from an entirely different icon set. Because no icons were common to the sample and testing arrays, discriminating higher-order relations was required for success on the tests. As have primates in similar tasks, pigeons successfully learned and transferred this relational discrimination, suggesting that both birds and mammals possess the cognitive antecedents of analogical reasoning.     

Are nominal same-different matches slower due to differences in level of processing or to response competition?

Eriksen, O’Hara, and Eriksen (1982) have proposed that the latency advantage ofsame overdifferent judgments when the match is based upon physical identity is due to differential amounts of response competition between the responses by which the judgment ofsame ordifferent is signified. Responses of “different” are slowed by a high level of priming in the competing response signifyingsame. In the present experiment, the response competition model is extended to nominal matches and in particular to what Proctor 1198D has termed the “name-physieal disparity”—a pair of letters are more rapidly judged to have the same name if they are the same ease (e.g., a a) than if they are in different eases (e.g., A a). While response competition effects were found to occur in nominal matches of this kind, the name-physieal disparity was greater than could be attributed solely to response competition. Evidence was obtained that part of the name-physieal disparity could be attributed to the subject’s having two chances to make a-nominal raatch when the letter pair was identical both physically and in name. The match could be made either on the basis of the physical or the name code. It was assumed that name and physical codes were processed at least partially independently.     

Concurrent cognitive processes in rat serial pattern learning: II. Discrimination learning,rule learning,chunk length,and multiple‐item memories

The current experiment examined the factors that determine acquisition for elements of highly structured serial patterns. Three groups of rats were trained on three patterns with parallel rule‐based hierarchical structure, but with 3‐, 4‐, or 5‐element chunks, each with a final violation element. Once rats mastered their patterns, probe patterns were introduced to answer several questions. To assess the extent to which the learned response pattern depended on intrachamber location cues for anticipating different element types, Spatial Shift Probes shifted the starting lever of patterns to locations that positioned chunk boundaries where they had never been experienced during training. To assess the extent to which a phrasing cue is necessary for rats to perform a chunk‐boundary response, a Cue Removal Probe tested whether rats would produce a chunk‐boundary response in the correct serial position if the phrasing cue was omitted. To assess the extent to which cues from multiple trials leading up to the violation element are required to anticipate the violation element, Multiple‐Item Memory Probes required rats to make an unexpected response on one of the elements in the last two chunks of the pattern prior to the violation element. The results indicated that rats used multiple concurrent learning and memory processes to master serial patterns, including discrimination learning, rule learning, encoding of chunk length, and multiple‐item memories.     

Limitations in advance task preparation: Switching the relevant stimulus dimension in speeded same—different comparisons

When participants switch between relevant stimulus dimensions in speeded classification tasks, taskswitching cost is reduced by advance preparation. Previous studies in which speeded classification tasks were used have suggested that this effect results from attending to the relevant stimulus dimension. Because selective attention to the relevant stimulus dimension in same—different judgments is relatively poor (e.g., Santee &; Egeth, 1980), it was predicted that advance task preparation for a shift in the relevant stimulus dimension would be compromised. This prediction was borne out in two experiments comparing dimension shifts (shape vs.fill) with task rule shifts (same? vs.different?) and shifts in the mapping of right—left keys toyes and_to responses (yes—no vs.no—yes). The results indicate that advance attentional selection of the relevant dimension is an optional preparatory strategy in task switching, employed only in conditions enabling flexible refocusing of attention.     

Memory-basedsame-different conceptualization by pigeons

We first trained pigeons to peck one button (same) after the successive presentation of 16 identical pictures and to peck a second button (different) after the successive presentation of 16 nonidentical pictures. Later, we tested the birds with other lists ofsame anddifferent items composed of completely novel pictures. Accuracy to the testing lists reliably exceeded chance levels, thus demonstratingsame-different conceptualization by pigeons under conditions that, for the first time, (1) eliminated purely perceptual mechanisms of discrimination learning and transfer and (2) required memory-based processing of the experimental stimuli.     

Positive effect of heterogeneity of difference on thesame-different disparity in letter matching

Subjects judged whether two adjacent letters were identical or different.Different pairs were similar, for example HM, DO, VY, or dissimilar, for example DY, HV,MO. According to the noisy-operator theory, increasing the heterogeneity of difference (external noise) by intermixing similar and dissimilardifferent pairs ought to produce faster but less accurate responses ondifferent trials. As predicted, the tendency to make more false-different responses (i.e., errors on same pairs) decreased when the similar and dissimilardifferent pairs were intermixed rather than presented in separate blocks. The fast-same effect did not change, however, seemingly due to criterion misadjustment. Proctor and Rao apparently found no effect of heterogeneity of difference on RT and errors because they used a less sensitive procedure (between-subjects design; different set of letters for more and less heterogeneous conditions). Consistent with the internal-noise principle, but not with the response-competition model of Eriksen, O’Hara, and Eriksen, the enhanced fast-same effect on blocks containing only similar (vs. dissimilar)different pairs was accompanied by an increased preponderance of false-different errors.     

Effect of intermixed foveal and parafoveal presentation onsame-different judgments: Evidence for a criterion-inertia model

Subjects judged whether two adjacent letters, which were presented either 0.5° (foveal or near condition) or 2.0° (parafoveal or far condition) from fixation, were identical or different. The preponderance of false-different responses (i.e., errors onsame trials) over false-same ones increased, whereas the fast-same effect was eliminated, on the far pairs, but only when they were intermixed with near pairs rather than presented in separate (pure) blocks of trials. Intermixing the near and far pairs produced the opposite trends on near trials (i.e., smaller preponderance of false-different errors, larger fast-same effect). Carr et al., who presented trigrams, found a similar criterion misadjustment, which likewise depended on intermixed presentation. They proposed that their easy (familiar or orthographically regular) pairs produced a bias or criterion shift towards “same.” No obvious biasing features were present in the near or far pairs, however, so the criterion misadjustment found here was attributed to the combined effect of internal noise and criterion inertia, not to criterion shifting. Increasing the level of internal noise on far trials produced more spurious perceived mismatches, but on mixed blocks of near and far trials, subjects relied on a common, compromise criterion for responding versus rechecking (recheck moderate perceived differences), instead of the separate, more appropriate criteria for near trials (recheck small differences) and far trials (recheck large differences) used on pure blocks.     

内隐序列学习中转移组块的数量和位置效应

表征质量理论对意识增长持渐进观点,忽视新异刺激对意识的突变式影响;新异刺激理论强调意识突变,忽视新异刺激本身的表征质量增长。本研究采用经典确定性内隐序列学习范式,将转移组块作为新异刺激,操控其数量和位置,探究新异刺激如何通过表征质量来影响内隐学习和意识。结果表明：（1）数量效应显著,即两个转移组块更能促进内隐学习量,说明新异刺激本身需要足够的表征质量才能发挥“意外事件”的作用。（2）在位置效应上,两个转移组块且靠前的设置更能提高受控意识,表明第一个新异刺激必须出现在原序列初级表征质量阶段,才能使被试对新异刺激和原序列进行对比,加之第二个新异刺激的与之呼应,促进原序列意识增加。     

Dissociating Medial Temporal and Striatal Memory Systems With a Same/Different Matching Task: Evidence for Two Neural Systems in Human Recognition

The medial temporal lobe and striatum have both been implicated as brain substrates of memory and learning. Here, we show dissociation between these two memory systems using a same/different matching task, in which subjects judged whether four-letter strings were the same or different. Different RT was determined by the left-to-right location of the first letter different between the study and test string, consistent with a left-to-right comparison of the study and test strings, terminating when a difference was found. This comparison process results in same responses being slower than different responses. Nevertheless, same responses were faster than different responses. Same responses were associated with hippocampus activation. Different responses were associated with both caudate and hippocampus activation. These findings are consistent with the dual-system hypothesis of mammalian memory and extend the model to human visual recognition.     

Chunk limits and length limits in immediate recall: a reconciliation

Whereas some research on immediate recall of verbal lists has suggested that it is limited by the number of chunks that can be recalled (e.g., N. Cowan, Z. Chen, & J. N. Rouder, 2004; E. Tulving & J. E. Patkau, 1962), other research has suggested that it is limited by the length of the material to be recalled (e.g., A. D. Baddeley, N. Thomson, & M. Buchanan, 1975). The authors investigated this question by teaching new paired associations between words to create 2-word chunks. The results suggest that both chunk capacity limits and length limits come into play. For the free recall of 12-word lists, 6 pre-learned pairs could be recalled about as well as 6 pre-exposed singletons, suggesting a chunk limit. However, for the serially ordered recall of 8-word lists, 4 pre-learned pairs could be recalled about as well as 8 pre-exposed singletons, suggesting a length limit. Other conditions yielded intermediate results suggesting that sometimes both limits may operate together.     

Spatial associations in relational reasoning: evidence for a SNARC-like effect

Relational reasoning (A > B, B > C, therefore A > C) shares a number of similarities with numerical cognition, including a common behavioural signature, the symbolic distance effect. Just as reaction times for evaluating relational conclusions decrease as the distance between two ordered objects increases, people need less time to compare two numbers when they are distant (e.g., 2 and 8) than when they are close (e.g., 3 and 4). Given that some remain doubtful about such analogical representations in relational reasoning, we determine whether numerical cognition and relational reasoning have other overlapping behavioural effects. Here, using relational reasoning problems that require the alignment of six items, we provide evidence showing that the subjects' linear mental representation affects motor performance when evaluating conclusions. Items accessible from the left part of a linear representation are evaluated faster when the response is made by the left, rather than the right, hand and the reverse is observed for items accessible from the right part of the linear representation. This effect, observed with the prepositions to the left of and to the right of as well as with above and below, is analogous to the SNARC (Spatial Numerical Association of Response Codes) effect, which is characterized by an interaction between magnitude of numbers and side of response.     

Seven-month-old infants chunk items in memory

Although working memory has a highly constrained capacity limit of three or four items, both adults and toddlers can increase the total amount of stored information by "chunking" object representations in memory. To examine the developmental origins of chunking, we used a violation-of-expectation procedure to ask whether 7-month-old infants, whose working memory capacity is still maturing, also can chunk items in memory. In Experiment 1, we found that in the absence of chunking cues, infants failed to remember three identical hidden objects. In Experiments 2 and 3, we found that infants successfully remembered three hidden objects when provided with overlapping spatial and featural chunking cues. In Experiment 4, we found that infants did not chunk when provided with either spatial or featural chunking cues alone. Finally, in Experiment 5, we found that infants also failed to chunk when spatial and featural cues specified different chunks (i.e., were pitted against each other). Taken together, these results suggest that chunking is available before working memory capacity has matured but still may undergo important development over the first year of life.