| Abstract: | Three explanations (internal noise, priming, relative frequency) of the fast-same effect were examined. The internal-noise principle, which predicts more errors as well as faster correct judgments on same pairs, was consistently confirmed even with sequential presentation. More elusive was priming, that is, the facilitation of encoding from letter repetition with sequential presentation. Priming was inhibited by the presence of intertrial letter repetition. The error data indicated that priming involves an increased efficiency in encoding (d'), as Proctor claimed, rather than a criterion shift (beta), as Krueger and Shapiro claimed. An alternative to the priming explanation, based on the greater susceptibility of simultaneous presentation to analytical processing, was tested and disconfirmed. Stimulus-set size did not affect the speed advantage for same pairs, thus disconfirming the relative-frequency explanation, according to which same judgments are faster because typically there are fewer unique same than different pairs. |
