Explore the vast range of titles available.

Words that sound dissimilar are recalled better than otherwise comparable words that sound similar on both immediate serial recall and immediate serial recognition tests, the so-called acoustic similarity effect. Although studies using immediate serial recall have shown an analogous visual similarity effect, in which words that look dissimilar are recalled better than words that look similar, this effect has not been examined in immediate serial recognition. We derived a prediction from the Feature Model that a visual similarity effect will be observed in immediate serial recognition only when the items are acoustically dissimilar; the model predicts no effect when the items are acoustically similar. Experiments 1 and 2 used visually dissimilar and visually similar stimuli that were all acoustically similar and replicated the visual similarity effect in serial recall but revealed no effect in serial recognition. Experiments 3 and 4 used a second set of stimuli that were acoustically dissimilar and found a visual similarity effect in both serial recall and serial recognition. The experiments confirm the Feature Model’s predictions and add to earlier findings that the two tests, serial recall and serial recognition, may show quite different results because the two tests are not as similar as previously thought.

In the missing item task, two short lists are presented. The test list contains all but one of the items from the study list in a new random order and the task is to report which item from the study list is missing. Murdock and Smith (2005) found that the time to correctly respond with the missing item was independent of the position of the missing item and was also independent of the list length. They argued that these data are difficult to accommodate by models that include a search process but are consistent with models that posit \"direct access\" such as the power set version of Theory of Distributed Associative Memory (TODAM). If direct access is occurring, redintegration cannot be occurring. Two experiments test the direct access account by determining whether two effects commonly ascribed to redintegration occur in the missing item task. Experiment 1 found a semantic relatedness effect and Experiment 2 found a word frequency effect. The presence of these effects is consistent with a redintegration account. Implications for TODAM and for an explanation based on the Feature Model are discussed. Dans la tâche de l'élément manquant, deux listes courtes sont présentées. La liste d'essai contient tous les éléments de la liste d'étude, sauf un, dans un nouvel ordre aléatoire, et la tâche consiste à indiquer quel élément de la liste d'étude est manquant. Murdock et Smith (2005) ont constaté que le temps nécessaire pour répondre correctement avec l'élément manquant était indépendant de la position de l'élément manquant et également indépendant de la longueur de la liste. Ils ont fait valoir que ces données sont difficiles à prendre en compte par les modèles qui incluent un processus de recherche, mais qu'elles sont cohérentes avec les modèles qui postulent un « accès direct », comme la version de la théorie de la mémoire associative distribuée (TODAM) basée sur l'ensemble puissance. Si l'accès direct se produit, la rédintégration ne peut pas se produire. Deux expériences testent le concept de l'accès direct en déterminant si deux effets couramment attribués à la rédintégration se produisent dans la tâche de l'élément manquant. L'expérience 1 a trouvé un effet de parenté sémantique et l'expérience 2 a trouvé un effet de fréquence de mot. La présence de ces effets est cohérente avec le concept de rédintégration. Les implications pour la TODAM et pour une explication basée sur le modèle Feature sont discutées. Public Significance Statement Remembering is assumed to require retrieval but results from the missing item task have been interpreted as showing direct access to memory. However, performance on this task was found to vary depending on the frequency of the words and also to differ when the words were semantically related. Because both frequency and semantic relatedness effects are thought to require retrieval, the direct access account was not supported.

A word's orthographic neighborhood is the set of words that differ from the target word by one letter. Both Roodenrys ( 2009 ) and Robert et al. ( Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 44, 119-125, 2015 ) posit that orthographic neighbors are activated when the target word is encountered in tasks such as simple and complex span. The two accounts differ in that the former predicts a beneficial effect of this activation, because it produces feedback activation that helps redintegrate the target word, whereas the latter predicts a detrimental effect, because the need to overcome the greater interference from the larger number of higher-frequency items reduces the processing resources available. Four experiments assess the predictions of these two accounts. Experiments 1 and 2 found a beneficial effect of having a higher- compared with a lower-frequency neighborhood in both a simple and a complex span task. Experiments 3 and 4 found no detrimental effect of having one or more neighbors with higher frequency than the target in both a simple and complex span task. Implications for the two theories are discussed.

Three memory tasks-Brown-Peterson, complex span, and continual distractor-all alternate presentation of a to-be-remembered item and a distractor activity, but each task is associated with a different memory system, short-term memory, working memory, and long-term memory, respectively. SIMPLE, a relative local distinctiveness model, has previously been fit to data from both the Brown-Peterson and continual distractor tasks; here we use the same version of the model to fit data from a complex span task. Despite the many differences between the tasks, including unpredictable list length, SIMPLE fit the data well. Because SIMPLE posits a single memory system, these results constitute yet another demonstration that performance on tasks originally thought to tap different memory systems can be explained without invoking multiple memory systems. Trois tâches de mémorisation - tâche de Brown-Peterson, tâche d'empan complexe, tâche avec distraction continue - comportent toutes en alternance un item à retenir et une activité de distraction, mais chacune est associée à un système mnémonique différent : la mémoire à court terme, la mémoire de travail et la mémoire à long terme, respectivement. Le modèle SIMPLE, modèle de distinctivité relative, a précédemment été ajusté aux données de la tâche de Brown-Peterson et à celles de tâches avec distraction continue. Ici, nous utilisons la même version du modèle ajusté pour une tâche d'empan complexe. En dépit des nombreuses différences entre les tâches, y compris la longueur imprévisible des listes, le modèle SIMPLE était bien ajusté aux données. Étant donné que SIMPLE postule l'existence d'un seul système mnémonique, ces résultats constituent une autre démonstration que le rendement dans le cadre de tâches que l'on croyait au départ reposer sur des systèmes différents, peut être expliqué sans évoquer la présence de multiples systèmes mnémoniques.

When people recall a list of items that they have just experienced (an episodic memory task), the resulting serial position function looks strikingly similar to that observed when people are asked to recall the presidents of the United States (a semantic memory task). Despite the similarity in appearance, there is disagreement about whether the two functions arise from the same processes. A local distinctiveness model of memory, SIMPLE, successfully fit the presidential data using two underlying dimensions: one corresponding to item (or presidential) distinctiveness and the other to order (or positional) distinctiveness. According to the model, presidential primacy and recency are due to the same mechanisms that give rise to primacy and recency effects in both shortand long-term episodic memory. All of these primacy and recency effects reflect the relative distinctiveness principle (Surprenant & Neath, 2009): Items will be well remembered to the extent that they are more distinct than competing items at the time of retrieval.

According to the item/order hypothesis, high-frequency words are processed more efficiently and therefore order information can be readily encoded. In contrast, low-frequency words are processed less efficiently and the focus on item-specific processing compromises order information. Most experiments testing this account use free recall, which has led to two problems: First, the role of order information is difficult to evaluate in free recall, and second, the data from free recall show all three possible patterns of results: memory for high-frequency words can be better than, the same as, or worse than that for low-frequency words. A series of experiments tested the item/order hypothesis using tests where the role of order information is less ambiguous. The item/order hypothesis predicts better performance for high- than low-frequency words when pure lists are used in both immediate serial recall (ISR) and serial reconstruction of order (SRO) tests. In contrast, when mixed (alternating) lists are used, it predicts better performance for low- than for high-frequency words with ISR tests, but equivalent performance with SRO tests. The experiments generally confirm these predictions, with the notable exception of a block order effect in SRO tasks: When a block of low-frequency lists preceded a block of high-frequency lists, a high-frequency advantage was observed but when a block of high-frequency lists preceded a block of low-frequency lists, no frequency effect was observed. A final experiment provides evidence that this block order effect is due to metacognitive factors.

In serial reconstruction of order tasks, high-frequency words are better remembered than otherwise equivalent low-frequency words. Neath and Quinlan (2021) found that although the usual high-frequency advantage was observed when subjects received a block of low-frequency lists first followed by a block of high-frequency lists, there was no frequency effect when subjects received a block of high-frequency lists followed by a block of low-frequency lists. In order to assess whether the block order effect simply reflects the inherent changeability of frequency effects, we manipulated concreteness, a much more stable effect. Experiment 1 found a block order effect with concreteness: The usual advantage for concrete over abstract words was observed only when the abstract block came first and the concrete block second; when the block order was reversed, no concreteness effect was seen. In Experiment 2, subjects did not know whether the test would be serial reconstruction of order or immediate serial recall until after list presentation. This eliminated the block order effect, just as when frequency was manipulated. Experiment 3 found a block order effect with a free reconstruction of order task and with both open and closed stimulus sets. Given that the pattern of results with concreteness is the same as with frequency, it suggests the block order effect is not unique to frequency and that a more general explanation, such as a metacognitive account, is needed. Dans le cadre de tâches de reconstruction de l'ordre sériel, on se souvient mieux des mots de haute fréquence que des mots de faible fréquence. Neath et Quinlan (2021) ont déterminé que l'avantage habituel attribué à la fréquence des mots était présent lorsque les sujets recevaient d'abord un bloc de listes de mots à faible fréquence, suivi d'un bloc de listes de mots à haute fréquence, mais que la fréquence n'avait pas d'effet lorsque les sujets recevaient un bloc de listes de mots à haute fréquence suivi d'un bloc de listes de mots à faible fréquence. Afin d'évaluer si l'effet de l'ordre des blocs reflète simplement la variabilité inhérente de l'effet de fréquence, nous avons manipulé la concrétude, dont l'effet est beaucoup plus stable. L'Expérience 1 a révélé un effet de l'ordre des blocs selon la concrétude : l'avantage habituel des mots concrets par rapport aux mots abstraits a été constaté seulement lorsque le bloc de mots abstraits était présenté en premier, et le bloc de mots concrets, en deuxième. Lorsque l'ordre des blocs était inversé, aucun effet de concrétude n'a été constaté. Dans l'Expérience 2, les sujets ne savaient pas si le test serait une reconstruction de l'ordre sériel ou une tâche de rappel sériel immédiatement après la présentation de listes. L'effet de l'ordre des blocs a été éliminé, comme dans le cas de la manipulation de la fréquence. L'Expérience 3 a révélé un effet de l'ordre des blocs dans le cadre d'une tâche de reconstruction de l'ordre sériel libre, à la fois avec des ensembles ouverts et fermés de stimuli. Étant donné que les résultats d'ensemble pour la concrétude sont les mêmes que pour la fréquence, il est suggéré que l'effet de l'ordre des blocs n'est pas unique à la fréquence, mais qu'il relève d'une explication plus générale, comme un rapport métacognitif. Public Significance Statement In a reconstruction of order test, people are asked to indicate the order in which a short list of items was presented. Performance on this task is affected by whether the words are common or rare, but only when the rare words are experienced first. We extend this result to a different manipulation, whether the word is more abstract or concrete, and suggest that even short-term memory tasks may be affected by people's intuitive ideas about task difficulty.

The Affective Embodiment Account posits that sensorimotor interactions play an important role in learning and processing concrete words whereas experiences from emotional states play an important role in learning and processing abstract words. Because of this, there should be greater enhancement of valence for abstract than for concrete words and therefore there should be an interaction between valence and concreteness. Although this prediction has been observed in a number of tasks, very few studies have looked specifically at memory. Three experiments are reported that assess whether valence interacts with concreteness in recognition. In Experiment 1 , recognition of concrete words was better than abstract, but there was no difference as a function of whether the words were positive or negative and there was no interaction. Experiment 2 compared positive and neutral words and Experiment 3 compared negative and neutral words; in both, there was a concreteness effect but no effect of valence and no interaction. These results replicate previous findings that when positive and negative words are equated more fully, valence has no effect on recognition, and also suggest a limit on the scope of the Affective Embodiment Account.

The neighbourhood size effect refers to the finding of better memory for words with more orthographic/phonological neighbours than otherwise comparable words with fewer neighbours. Although many studies have replicated this result with serial recall, only one has used serial recognition. Greeno et al. (2022) found no neighbourhood size effect when a large stimulus pool was used and a reverse effect-better performance for small neighbourhood words-when a small stimulus pool was used. We reexamined these results but made two methodological changes. First, for the large pool, we randomly generated lists for each subject rather than creating one set of lists that all subjects experienced. Second, for the small pool, we randomly generated a small pool for each subject rather than using one small pool for all subjects. In both cases, we observed a neighbourhood size effect consistent with results from the serial recall literature. Implications for methodology and theoretical accounts of both the neighbourhood size effect and serial recognition are discussed. L'effet de la taille du voisinage fait référence à la constatation d'une meilleure mémoire pour les mots ayant plus de voisins orthographiques/phonologiques que pour les mots comparables ayant moins de voisins. Bien que de nombreuses études aient reproduit ce résultat avec le rappel sériel, une seule a utilisé la reconnaissance sérielle. Greeno et al. (2022) n'ont pas constaté d'effet de la taille du voisinage lorsqu'un grand ensemble de stimuli était utilisé, et un effet inverse - une meilleure performance pour les mots du petit voisinage - lorsqu'un petit groupe de stimuli était utilisé. Nous avons réexaminé ces résultats en apportant deux changements méthodologiques. Dans le cas du grand groupe, nous avons généré des listes au hasard pour chaque sujet au lieu de créer un ensemble de listes que tous les sujets ont expérimenté. Dans le cas du petit groupe, nous avons généré au hasard un petit groupe pour chaque sujet au lieu d'utiliser un seul petit groupe pour tous les sujets. Dans les deux cas, nous avons observé un effet de taille du voisinage qui correspond aux résultats de la littérature sur le rappel sériel. Les implications pour la méthodologie et les comptes rendus théoriques de l'effet de taille du voisinage et de la reconnaissance sérielle sont discutées. Public Significance Statement A challenge in experimental psychology is to design experiments that will produce the most robust findings possible. Our study examined the impact of stimulus randomization on a serial recognition task, in which people indicate whether the words in two lists are in the same or different order. Full randomization of stimuli yielded results consistent with other related tasks but different to findings using more limited controls of the stimuli, thus underscoring the importance of methods that minimize the likelihood of the ungeneralizable effect.