These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Multiple mechanisms for recency with vowels and consonants.
    Author: Battacchi MW, Pelamatti GM, Umiltà C.
    Journal: Mem Cognit; 1989 May; 17(3):329-36. PubMed ID: 2725270.
    Abstract:
    Three experiments were conducted to test the hypothesis that the difference in recency effect between vowel-contrasting and stop-contrasting lists of syllables in immediate ordered recall can be explained by item discriminability and regular short-term memory mechanisms, without any recourse to echoic memory or precategorical acoustic storage (PAS). In Experiment 1, the short-term memory mechanisms were manipulated by reducing amount of output interference and length of retention interval. The partial-report technique was used. The most important finding was the usual final-position recency effect (difference in recall between the fifth and sixth serial positions) for the vowel lists but not for the stop lists, regardless of the type of report. Thus the PAS theory could not be rejected. In Experiments 2 and 3, the last item was differentiated from the other items of the list, either by lengthening the interstimulus interval between the last and the next-to-last (Experiment 2) or by increasing the intensity of the last item (Experiment 3). In both cases, an increase of the final-position recency effect was found even for stop lists. Since a drop in recall errors was also obtained for the fourth item when its intensity was increased (von Restorff effect), this final-position recency effect for stop lists is likely to be due to item discriminability, and not to echoic memory for the last item. Item discriminability appeared to be the critical factor.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]