Is the picture bizarreness effect a generation effect?

Bizarre stimuli usually facilitate recall compared to common stimuli. This investigation explored the so-called bizarreness effect in free recall by using 80 simple line drawings of common objects (common vs bizarre). 64 subjects participated with 16 subjects in each group. Half of the subjects received learning instructions and the other half rated the bizarreness of each drawing. Moreover, drawings were presented either alone or with the name of the object under mixed-list encoding conditions. After the free recall task, subjects had to make metamemory judgments about how many items of each format they had seen and recalled. The key result was that a superiority of bizarre pictures over common ones was found in all conditions although performance was better when the pictures were presented alone than with their corresponding label. Subsequent metamemory judgments, however, showed that subjects underestimated the number of bizarre items actually recalled.     

The SNARC effect: an instance of the Simon effect?

Our aim was to investigate the relations between the Spatial-Numerical Association of Response Codes (SNARC) effect and the Simon effect. In Experiment 1 participants were required to make a parity judgment to numbers from 1 to 9 (without 5), by pressing a left or a right key. The numbers were presented to either the left or right side of fixation. Results showed the Simon effect (left-side stimuli were responded to faster with the left hand than with the right hand whereas right-side stimuli were responded to faster with the right hand), and the SNARC effect (smaller numbers were responded to faster with the left hand than with the right hand, whereas larger numbers were responded to faster with the right hand). No interaction was found between the Simon and SNARC effects, suggesting that they combine additively. In Experiment 2 the temporal distance between formation of the task-relevant non-spatial stimulus code and the task-irrelevant stimulus spatial code was increased. As in Experiment 1, results showed the presence of the Simon and SNARC effects but no interaction between them. Moreover, we found a regular Simon effect for faster RTs, and a reversed Simon effect for longer RTs. In contrast, the SNARC effect did not vary as a function of RT. Taken together, the results of the two experiments show that the SNARC effect does not simply constitute a variant of the Simon effect. This is considered to be evidence that number representation and space representation rest on different neural (likely parietal) circuits.     

Can the irrelevant speech effect turn into a stimulus suffix effect?

The irrelevant sound effect (ISE) and the stimulus suffix effect (SSE) are two qualitatively different phenomena, although in both paradigms irrelevant auditory material is played while a verbal serial recall task is being performed. Jones, Macken, and Nicholls (2004) Jones, D. M., Macken, W. J. and Nicholls, A. P. 2004. The phonological store of working memory: Is it phonological and is it a store?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30: 656–674. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar] have proposed the effect of irrelevant speech on auditory serial recall to switch from an ISE to an SSE mechanism, if the auditory-perceptive similarity of relevant and irrelevant material is maximized. The experiment reported here (n = 36) tested this hypothesis by exploring auditory serial recall performance both under irrelevant speech and under speech suffix conditions. These speech materials were spoken either by the same voice as the auditory items to be recalled or by a different voice. The experimental conditions were such that the likelihood of obtaining an SSE was maximized. The results, however, show that irrelevant speech—in contrast to speech suffixes—affects auditory serial recall independently of its perceptive similarity to the items to be recalled and thus in terms of an ISE mechanism that crucially extends to recency. The ISE thus cannot turn into an SSE.     

Can the irrelevant speech effect turn into a stimulus suffix effect?

The irrelevant sound effect (ISE) and the stimulus suffix effect (SSE) are two qualitatively different phenomena, although in both paradigms irrelevant auditory material is played while a verbal serial recall task is being performed. Jones, Macken, and Nicholls (2004) have proposed the effect of irrelevant speech on auditory serial recall to switch from an ISE to an SSE mechanism, if the auditory-perceptive similarity of relevant and irrelevant material is maximized. The experiment reported here (n = 36) tested this hypothesis by exploring auditory serial recall performance both under irrelevant speech and under speech suffix conditions. These speech materials were spoken either by the same voice as the auditory items to be recalled or by a different voice. The experimental conditions were such that the likelihood of obtaining an SSE was maximized. The results, however, show that irrelevant speech—in contrast to speech suffixes—affects auditory serial recall independently of its perceptive similarity to the items to be recalled and thus in terms of an ISE mechanism that crucially extends to recency. The ISE thus cannot turn into an SSE.     

Does the isolation effect require attention?

An item that differs from the surrounding items is remembered better than an item that is consistent with its surroundings; this is known as the von Restorff effect or isolation effect (von Restorff, Psychologische Forschung, 18, 299–342, 1933). Theoretical explanations have proposed that the isolate is processed differently from control items, though some research has suggested that this processing might require more attention for semantic than for physical isolates. To test this possibility, in the present study we examined the isolation effects for physical isolates and semantic isolates under full and divided attention. Participants viewed lists of categorized words, with some lists containing either a physical or a semantic isolate, followed by immediate written free recall. Across three experiments, divided attention eliminated the semantic isolation effect but did not impact the physical isolation effect. Furthermore, semantic isolates were output earlier in recall than controls, whereas physical isolates were output more similarly to controls. These findings suggest that semantic isolation effects require attention during encoding, whereas physical isolation effects are relatively automatic.     

What effect can rhythmic finger tapping have on the phonological similarity effect?

The effects of rhythmic finger tapping on the phonological similarity effect were investigated in two experiments. In both, subjects were tested for serial recall of visually presented letter sequences that were either phonologically similar or dissimilar. The letter sequences had to be remembered under three tapping conditions: right-hand tapping, left-hand tapping, and a no-tapping control. Experiment 1 showed clear phonological similarity effects in both the control and the left-hand tapping conditions, but not in the right-hand tapping condition, when recall responses were written with the right hand. When the number of tapping practice trials was fixed at two and recall was vocal in Experiment 2, the phonological similarity effect was eliminated in both the right-hand and the left-hand tapping conditions. These results suggest that some form of speech motor programs played an important role in serial recall.     

How crucial is the response format for the testing effect?

Combining study and test trials during learning is more beneficial for long-term retention than repeated study without testing (i.e., the testing effect). Less is known about the relative efficacy of different response formats during testing. We tested the hypothesis that overt testing (typing responses on a keyboard) during a practice phase benefits later memory more than covert testing (only pressing a button to indicate successful retrieval). In Experiment 1, three groups learned 40 word pairs either by repeatedly studying them, by studying and overtly testing them, or by studying and covertly testing them. In Experiment 2, only the two testing conditions were manipulated in a within-subjects design. In both experiments, participants received cued recall tests after a short (~19 min) and a long (1 week) retention interval. In Experiment 1, all groups performed equally well at the short retention interval. The overt testing group reliably outperformed the repeated study group after 1 week, whereas the covert testing group performed insignificantly different from both these groups. Hence, the testing effect was demonstrated for overt, but failed to show for covert testing. In Experiment 2, overtly tested items were better and more quickly retrieved than those covertly tested. Further, this does not seem to be due to any differences in retrieval effort during learning. To conclude, overt testing was more beneficial for later retention than covert testing, but the effect size was small. Possible explanations are discussed.     

On the origin of the “cumulative semantic inhibition” effect

We investigated whether the cumulative semantic inhibition effect found by Howard, Nickels, Coltheart, and Cole-Virtue (2006) provides information about semantic representations. By applying more sensitive statistical analyses to the original data set, we found a significant variation in the magnitude of the effect across categories. This variation cannot be explained by the naming speed of each category. In addition, using a subsample of the data, a second cumulative effect arouse for newly defined supracategories, over and above the effect of the original ones. We discuss these findings in terms of the representations that drive lexical access and show that they favor featural or distributed hypotheses.     

What is the role of affect in the spacing effect?

In Experiments 1 and 2, after studying a list containing connotatively neutral words that were presented once or were presented at various spacing intervals, subjects either attempted free recall or made affective judgments of the study-list targets along a pleasant/unpleasant dimension. Spacing effects occurred in recall, and massed items were judged to be more unpleasantthan once-presented and spaced words. In the third experiment, subjects studied homogeneous lists composed of either connotatively good words or connotativelybad ones. Spacing effects were absent in the recall of both types of words because massed-practice words were recalled at a high level, one that was about the same as that for spaced-practice words. Affective judgments were unrelated to presentation condition, and both good and bad massed words were judged to be positive in affect. Although the data suggest that different study conditions can lead to different affective reactions, the results are moot with regard to the relationship between affect and the magnitude of spacing effects.     

Revisiting the “strong but wrong“ effect

In the 1930s, J. M. Stephens found that strong verbal associations called wrong are more likely to be changed than weak verbal associations called wrong, relative to items with no feedback. The present study produced a much larger "strong but wrong" effect, apparently as a result of defining "strong" in terms of meanings presumably stored in long-term memory. It was also found that such items are followed by high recall of feedback on the next trial, and that, indeed, when feedback recall is statistically controlled, the effect disappears. An explanation of why feedback is better recalled for "strong but wrong" items is offered, and several predictions are generated, some of which are tested (and confirmed) from the present data.     

Does the generation effect occur for pictures?

The generation effect is the finding that self-generated stimuli are recalled and recognized better than read stimuli. The effect has been demonstrated primarily with words. This article examines the effect for pictures in two experiments: Subjects named complete pictures (name condition) and fragmented pictures (generation condition). In Experiment 1, memory was tested in 3 explicit tasks: free recall, yes/no recognition, and a source-monitoring task on whether each picture was complete or fragmented (the complete/incomplete task). The generation effect was found for all 3 tasks. However, in the recognition and source-monitoring tasks, the generation effect was observed only in the generation condition. We hypothesized that absence of the effect in the name condition was due to the sensory or process match effect between study and test pictures and the superior identification of pictures in the name condition. Therefore, stimuli were changed from pictures to their names in Experiment 2. Memory was tested in the recognition task, complete/incomplete task, and second source-monitoring task (success/failure) on whether each picture had been identified successfully. The generation effect was observed for all 3 tasks. These results suggest that memory of structural and semantic characteristics and of success in identification of generated pictures may contribute to the generation effect.     

Does the Simon effect affect movement execution?

The present work set out to test the prediction of the dual-route response selection account of the Simon effect, which maintains that the Simon effect, and its facilitation and interference components, should show up at the response selection stage irrespective of when it takes place during processing. Previous works have shown that in the case of a movement response, two strategies can be adopted for responding. The main difference between these two response strategies consists of when response selection operations take place. The two experiments reported in the present study showed that when response selection operates clearly before movement initiations, the Simon effect shows up in reaction time and not in movement time.     

Representational momentum and the flash‐lag effect

Representational momentum (RM) is a distortion where the final orientation of a moving object is misremembered as further along its trajectory. Experiments reported here examine RM when an additional object was flashed just as the moving object disappeared. When the task was to judge the flashed object, participants reported that the flash appeared to lag behind (flash‐lag effect; FLE). When the task was to judge the moving object, larger forward distortions for the moving object were found when the flash was present, despite previous evidence that the FLE depends on the moving object's continued presence. The results suggest that some part of the FLE depends upon what precedes the flash. In addition, equivalent RM was observed for implied and smoothly animated events, a possible limit to the velocity effect for RM was found, and larger positive distortions were found for downward rotations.     

Are microsaccades responsible for the gap effect?

Extinguishing a fixation point shortly before, or concurrently with, the onset of a peripheral visual target reduces the latency of saccades to that target. Saslow (1967) hypothesized that thisgap effect might occur because fixation point offsets reduce the incidence of corrective microsaccades with an associated saccadic refractory period. In the present study, a robust gap effect was obtained. However, using a Purkinje image eyetracker with 1 arcmin of resolution, we found that fixation point offsets had no effect on the occurrence of microsaccades and that the occurrence of microsaccades had no impact on the magnitude of the gap effect. Microsaccades therefore do not appear to play any part in the production of the gap effect.     

Does familiarity change in the revelation effect?

The revelation effect describes the increased tendency to call items "old" when a recognition judgment is preceded by an incidental task. Past findings show that d' for recognition decreases following revelation, evidence that the revelation effect is due to familiarity change. However, data from receiver operating characteristic curves from 3 experiments produced no evidence of changes in recognition sensitivity. The authors illustrate how the use of a single-point measure like d' can be misleading when familiarity distribution variances are unequal. Also investigated was whether the effect depends on the revelation materials used. Neither the memorability of the revelation items, their similarity to recognition probes, nor the difficulty of the task changed the size of the effect. Thus, the revelation effect is not the result of a memory retrieval mechanism and seems to be generic and all-or-nothing. These characteristics are consistent with response bias rather than familiarity change.     

Color—luminance relationships and the McCollough effect

The McCollough effect is an orientation-specific color aftereffect induced by adapting to colored gratings. We examined how the McCollough effect depends on the relationships between color and luminance within the inducing and test gratings and compared the aftereffects to the color changes predicted from selective adaptation to different color—luminance combinations. Our results suggest that the important contingency underlying the McCollough effect is between orientation and color—luminance direction and are consistent with sensitivity changes within mechanisms tuned to specific color—luminance directions. Aftereffects are similar in magnitude for adapting color pairs that differ only in S cone excitation or L and M cone excitation, and they have a similar dependence on spatial frequency. In particular, orientation-specific aftereffects are induced for S cone colors even when the grating frequencies are above the S cone resolution limit. Thus, the McCollough effect persists even when different cone classes encode the orientation and color of the gratings.     

Music in the moment? Revisiting the effect of large scale structures

The psychological relevance of large-scale musical structures has been a matter of debate in the music community. This issue was investigated with a method that allows assessing listeners' detection of musical incoherencies in normal and scrambled versions of popular and contemporary music pieces. Musical excerpts were segmented into 28 or 29 chunks. In the scrambled version, the temporal order of these chunks was altered with the constraint that the transitions between two chunks never created local acoustical and musical disruptions. Participants were required (1) to detect on-line incoherent linking of chunks, (2) to rate aesthetic quality of pieces, and (3) to evaluate their overall coherence. The findings indicate a moderate sensitivity to large-scale musical structures for popular and contemporary music in both musically trained and untrained listeners. These data are discussed in light of current models of music cognition.