Incidental retention of speaker’s voice

Geiselman and Bellezza (1976) concluded that any retention in memory of the sex of a speaker of verbal material is automatic. Two possible reasons for this were hypothesized: the voice-connotation hypothesis and the dual-hemisphere parallel-processing hypothesis. In Experiment 1, the to-be-remembered sentences contained either male or female agents. Incidental retention of sex of speaker did not occur. This result does not support the dual-hemisphere parallel-processing hypothesis, which indicates that retention of voice should be independent of sentence content. In Experiment 2, the sentences contained neutral agents and incidental retention of sex of speaker did occur. The results of Experiments 1 and 2 support the connotation hypothesis. The different results with regard to incidental retention of speakers’s voice found in Experiments 1 and 2 were replicated in Experiment 3 using a within-subjects design. Experimemt 4 was conducted to determine if a speaker’s voice does, in fact, influence the meaning of a neutral sentence. In agreement with the voice-connotation hypothesis, sentences spoken by a male were rated as having more “potent” connotations than sentences spoken by a female.     

Long-term memory for speaker’s voice and source location

One hundred and twenty-eight subjects tried to recall 20 simple sentences that for some subjects were presented in two different voices or were presented from two loudspeakers on different sides of the room. In addition, some subjects were instructed to remember not only the sentences, but also their voice and location attributes. Intentional instructions for location resulted in poorer recall of the sentences, but intentional instructions for voice did not. The voice attribute seemed to be automatically coded under both intentional and incidental instructions for remembering the attribute, whereas the location attribute seemed to require cognitive processing in addition to that required for encoding the meaning of the sentence. A test for clustering by voice in recall was done to determine if the evidence for automatic ceding of voice was merely an artifact resulting from better recall because of organization. However, no clustering was found. The ideas that speaker's voice and sentence meaning were processed in parallel by different hemispheres of the brain and that the connotation of the voice influenced the meaning of each sentence were offered as two possible explanations of the results.     

Updating memory using mnemonic devices

The process of memory updating enables people to recall information most recently associated with a particular stimulus context and to ignore or forget information previously associated with it. In a series of five experiments utilizing mnemonic devices it was found that when associative interference was maximized, only a limited disruption of updating resulted. In addition, mnemonic recall was not dependent on the utilization of higher-order memory components. However, support was found for the hypothesis that memory can be searched using temporal cues and for the idea that the size of the search set formed in memory is important. It was found that the older the event was to be recalled, the greater were the number of events in the search set and therefore the greater was the magnitude of the recall error. The size of the search set created in memory and the role of temporal-contextual cues in defining this search set may be important factors not only in mnemonic recall but in other types of learning and recall as well.     

Operational efficiency and the growth of short-term memory span

Four studies are reported which link developmental increases in memory span with developmental increases in operational speed or efficiency. In the first, a linear relationship is demonstrated between increases in word span and increases in speed of word repetition. In the second, adults and 6-year-olds are equated on speed of word repetition, by manipulating word familiarity. It is shown that their word spans are no longer different under these conditions. Similar findings are then reported for a test of M space called “Counting Span.” First, a linear relationship is demonstrated between increases in Counting Span and increases in speed of counting. Next, adults and 6-year-olds are equated on speed of counting, by forcing adults to count in an unfamiliar language. It is shown that their counting spans are no longer different under these conditions. The conclusion is that developmental increases in memory span do not result from increases in total processing space. Rather, with development, basic operations become faster and more efficient. This means that they require less processing space, and that more space becomes available for storage as a result.     

In the blink of an electronic eye: A prospectus

Some potential uses of computers for education and training paradigms are discussed. These capitalize on the capabilities to provide analog feedback about ongoing “real-time” events. In particular, we examine the use of computers to detect nuances and subtleties in rhythm and timing. Examples are suggested, including new controls for interactive computers and ways of using such machines for training in motor skills.     

Multivariable-multimethod analysis of the dimensions of interpersonal behavior

This study attempted to assess the degree of empirical convergence of various measures of the dimensions of interpersonal behavior when method variance is controlled. A total of 83 undergraduates (38 males, 45 females) were administered the Personality Research Form (PRF) and several self-report measures of social anxiety and effectiveness. In addition, they participated in a forced-interaction task with a confederate, from which ratings of anxiety and effectiveness were obtained. A two-step principal-components procedure was used in order to control method variance. Substantial cross-domain convergence was found in three of the four second-order components, two of which (Social Competence and Impulse Expression vs Control) clearly represented dimensions of interpersonal behavior. Strong support was found for the validity of several PRF components as well as of other instruments used as measures of constructs. Results suggest that the purported failure of trait constructs in accounting for behavioral variance may be more the result of methodological factors than of theoretical inadequacy.     

On this,that, and the other: Nonegocentrism in very young children

The development of comprehension and production of spatial deictic terms “this/that”, “here/there”, “my/your”, and “in front of/behind” was investigated in the context of a hide-and-seek game. The first three contrasts are produced according to the speaker's perspective, so comprehension requires a nonegocentric viewpoint. The contrast “in front of/behind” is produced relative to the hearer, i.e., production is nonegocentric. The subjects were 39 children, rangin in age from 2.5–4.5 years, and 18 college undergraduates. The 2.5-year-old children were best at those contrasts which do not require a shift in perspective. The 3- and 4-year-old children were adept at switching to the speaker's perspective for comprehension of the terms requiring this shift, i.e., were nonegocentric. Four-year-olds were also capable of nonegocentric production of “in front of/behind”.     

Processing strategies in picture-sentence verification tasks

The encoding and comparison strategies used by observers in matching pictures and sentences were investigated. The location of the mismatch or difference between a sentence and a picture was varied, and the latencies of "same"-"different" responses were compared as a function of whether the mismatch occurred in the sentence subject, verb, or object. Sentences were presented auditorily and varied in both voice and reversibility. Pictures either preceded or were presented simultaneously with the sentences. In all cases, Ss adopted a serial self-terminating comparison strategy and a surface structure encoding strategy: The comparison was terminated as soon as a mismatch was encountered, and actives were processed in the order subject-verb-object, whereas passives were processed in the order object-verb-subject.