Limits...
A matter of emphasis: Linguistic stress habits modulate serial recall.

Taylor JC, Macken B, Jones DM - Mem Cognit (2015)

Bottom Line: Models of short-term memory for sequential information rely on item-level, feature-based descriptions to account for errors in serial recall.However, in two experiments, we demonstrated that the characteristics of the sequence are what determine the fates of items, rather than the properties ascribed to the items themselves.Performance in alternating sequences is determined by the way that the sequences themselves induce particular prosodic rehearsal patterns, and not by the nature of the items per se.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff, CF10 3AT, UK, taylorj29@cardiff.ac.uk.

ABSTRACT
Models of short-term memory for sequential information rely on item-level, feature-based descriptions to account for errors in serial recall. Transposition errors within alternating similar/dissimilar letter sequences derive from interactions between overlapping features. However, in two experiments, we demonstrated that the characteristics of the sequence are what determine the fates of items, rather than the properties ascribed to the items themselves. Performance in alternating sequences is determined by the way that the sequences themselves induce particular prosodic rehearsal patterns, and not by the nature of the items per se. In a serial recall task, the shapes of the canonical "saw-tooth" serial position curves and transposition error probabilities at successive input-output distances were modulated by subvocal rehearsal strategies, despite all item-based parameters being held constant. We replicated this finding using nonalternating lists, thus demonstrating that transpositions are substantially influenced by prosodic features-such as stress-that emerge during subvocal rehearsal.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Serial position plots depicting mean (N = 16) performance obtained for six-item, alternating SD (left) and DS (right) sequences under the two rehearsal strategies. Error bars denote standard errors
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4555234&req=5

Fig3: Serial position plots depicting mean (N = 16) performance obtained for six-item, alternating SD (left) and DS (right) sequences under the two rehearsal strategies. Error bars denote standard errors

Mentions: Correct-in-position proportion-correct scores were plotted separately for each grouping strategy condition (Fig. 3). Performance for both of the similarity structures approximated to a saw-tooth pattern under both rehearsal conditions. More generally (and consistent with previous reports), recall for similar-sounding items can be seen to be inferior to that for dissimilar-sounding items. However, the saw-tooth patterns are not symmetrical for SD and DS formats within each rehearsal condition, nor do identical structures appear to drive equivalent performance between the two conditions. These two asymmetries emerge from sequences that are—item by item—identical, and they address complementary aspects of our hypothesis. Asymmetry within a grouping condition implies that perceptual and/or prosodic organizational factors interact differently with each similarity structure (i.e., that SD and DS structures are nonequivalent). Meanwhile, the effects between grouping conditions suggest that transposition likelihoods are also modulated by the particular syllabic and prosodic structures imposed by rehearsal (cf. Shattuck-Hufnagel, 1992).Fig. 3


A matter of emphasis: Linguistic stress habits modulate serial recall.

Taylor JC, Macken B, Jones DM - Mem Cognit (2015)

Serial position plots depicting mean (N = 16) performance obtained for six-item, alternating SD (left) and DS (right) sequences under the two rehearsal strategies. Error bars denote standard errors
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4555234&req=5

Fig3: Serial position plots depicting mean (N = 16) performance obtained for six-item, alternating SD (left) and DS (right) sequences under the two rehearsal strategies. Error bars denote standard errors
Mentions: Correct-in-position proportion-correct scores were plotted separately for each grouping strategy condition (Fig. 3). Performance for both of the similarity structures approximated to a saw-tooth pattern under both rehearsal conditions. More generally (and consistent with previous reports), recall for similar-sounding items can be seen to be inferior to that for dissimilar-sounding items. However, the saw-tooth patterns are not symmetrical for SD and DS formats within each rehearsal condition, nor do identical structures appear to drive equivalent performance between the two conditions. These two asymmetries emerge from sequences that are—item by item—identical, and they address complementary aspects of our hypothesis. Asymmetry within a grouping condition implies that perceptual and/or prosodic organizational factors interact differently with each similarity structure (i.e., that SD and DS structures are nonequivalent). Meanwhile, the effects between grouping conditions suggest that transposition likelihoods are also modulated by the particular syllabic and prosodic structures imposed by rehearsal (cf. Shattuck-Hufnagel, 1992).Fig. 3

Bottom Line: Models of short-term memory for sequential information rely on item-level, feature-based descriptions to account for errors in serial recall.However, in two experiments, we demonstrated that the characteristics of the sequence are what determine the fates of items, rather than the properties ascribed to the items themselves.Performance in alternating sequences is determined by the way that the sequences themselves induce particular prosodic rehearsal patterns, and not by the nature of the items per se.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff, CF10 3AT, UK, taylorj29@cardiff.ac.uk.

ABSTRACT
Models of short-term memory for sequential information rely on item-level, feature-based descriptions to account for errors in serial recall. Transposition errors within alternating similar/dissimilar letter sequences derive from interactions between overlapping features. However, in two experiments, we demonstrated that the characteristics of the sequence are what determine the fates of items, rather than the properties ascribed to the items themselves. Performance in alternating sequences is determined by the way that the sequences themselves induce particular prosodic rehearsal patterns, and not by the nature of the items per se. In a serial recall task, the shapes of the canonical "saw-tooth" serial position curves and transposition error probabilities at successive input-output distances were modulated by subvocal rehearsal strategies, despite all item-based parameters being held constant. We replicated this finding using nonalternating lists, thus demonstrating that transpositions are substantially influenced by prosodic features-such as stress-that emerge during subvocal rehearsal.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus