Accuracy of temporal coding: Auditory-visual comparisons

Schab, Frank R.; Crowder, Robert G.

doi:10.3758/bf03202612

Cited by 30 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Contrary to the earlier findings (e.g., Glenberg et al, 1989), Crowder and Greene (1987;see also Watkins, LeCompte, Elliott, & Fish, 1992) found no advantage for vocalized as opposed to silently read stimuli. Schab and Crowder (1989) replicated these findings, using absolute rather than relative temporal judgments. In addition, using a free recall task Neath and Crowder (1990, Experiment 3) compared auditory and visual presentations of predetermined duration and found the benefits of temporal isolation to be equal for both modalities.…”

Section: Temporal Isolation Effects and Modalitymentioning

confidence: 53%

Distinctiveness revisited: Unpredictable temporal isolation does not benefit short-term serial recall of heard or seen events

Nimmo

Lewandowsky

2006

Memory & Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The notion of a link between time and memory is intuitively appealing and forms the core assumption of temporal distinctiveness models. Distinctiveness models predict that items that are temporally isolated from their neighbors at presentation should be recalled better than items that are temporally crowded. By contrast, event-based theories consider time to be incidental to the processes that govern memory, and such theories would not imply a temporal isolation advantage unless participants engaged in a consolidation process (e.g., rehearsal or selective encoding) that exploited the temporal structure of the list. In this report, we examine two studies that assessed the effect of temporal distinctiveness on memory, using auditory (Experiment 1) and auditory and visual (Experiment 2) presentation with unpredictably varying interitem intervals. The results show that with unpredictable intervals temporal isolation does not benefit memory, regardless of presentation modality.

show abstract

Section: Temporal Isolation Effects and Modalitymentioning

confidence: 53%

Distinctiveness revisited: Unpredictable temporal isolation does not benefit short-term serial recall of heard or seen events

Nimmo

Lewandowsky

2006

Memory & Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this experiment, neither the modality of the signals nor the modality of the to-be-remembered items affected the accuracy with which subjects reproduced a temporal pattern. These findings add to a growing number of studies that show no modality difference when temporal information is manipulated (e.g., Crowder & Greene, 1987;Neath & Crowder, 1990;Schab & Crowder, 1989). …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 82%

Modality, concreteness, and set-size effects in a free reconstruction of order task

Neath

1997

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wouldinforming subjects which items were presented on the current list remove effects of presentation modality, concreteness, and set size in a long-term free reconstruction of order task? In Experiment 1,a typical modality effect was found: memory for the fmal item in a list was enhanced when the item was presented auditorily rather than visually. In Experiment 2, order memory was better for concrete than for abstract items. And in Experiment 3, order memory was better when the same six items were presented on every trial than when a unique set of six items was presented. In all conditions in all experiments, the to-be-remembered items were given to the subject at test. These results suggest that contrary to a popular assumption, the reconstruction of order task does not provide a functionally pure measure of order memory.Accurately reproducing the order ofa list of items or set ofevents requires remembering two different kinds of information: information about the identity of each item, and information about the presentation order (Crowder, 1976;Healy, 1974). In the typical recall task, such as serial recall, these two sources of information are confounded and cannot be easily separated. In an attempt to eliminate such confounds, some researchers have adopted a task known as reconstruction of order (e.g., Healy, Fendrich, Cunningham, & Till, 1987;Nairne, 1991Nairne, , 1992Nairne & Neumann, 1993).In this task, a series of items is presented, and at test the same items are presented again, either in a new random order or in alphabetical order. Presumably, all relevant item information is available to the subject, who is now free to indicate the original presentation order. Typically, subjects are free to reconstruct the order in any manner they choose; for example, a subject might choose to indicate which item occurred in Position 5 first, and then indicate which item occurred in Position 1 second, and so forth. This free reconstruction of order task may be contrasted with serial reconstruction of order, which requires the subject to indicate which item occurred in Position 1 first, which item occurred in Position 2 second, and so on. Because all necessary item information is given to the subject at the time of test, the free reconstruction of order task "is typically seen as a pure test of position or order memory" (Whiteman, Nairne, & Serra, 1994, p. 276). The three experiments reported here demonstrate that functionally a free reconstruction of order task is not necessarily a pure measure of order memory: Even when subjects are informed of the I thank Aimee M. Surprenant for comments on an earlier version of this manuscript, James S.

show abstract

“…Consistent with this, Crowder and Greene (1987) and Schab and Crowder (1989) performed experiments in order to demonstrate that there really are no temporal differences between the modalities when linguistic materials are employed. More germane to rhythms are the data of Watkins, LeCompte, and Fish (1992), whose experiments showed an auditory temporal advantage only when concurrent silent mouthing of the word blah suppressed subvocal recoding of visual input stimuli and only when the stimuli consisted of the same item repeated.…”

mentioning

confidence: 71%

Modality differences in short-term memory for rhythms

Collier

Logan

2000

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior research has established that performance in short-term memory tasks using auditory rhythmic stimuli is frequently superior to that in tasks usingvisual stimuli, In fiveexperiments, the reasons for this were explored further. In a same-different task, pairs of brief rhythms were presented in which each rhythm was visual or auditory, resulting in two same-modality conditions and two cross-modality conditions. Three different rates of presentation were used. The results supported the temporal advantage of the auditory modality in short-term memory, which was quite robust at the quickest presentation rates. This advantage tended to decay as the presentation rate was slowed down, consistent with the view that, with time, the temporal patterns were being recoded into a more generic form.

show abstract

Accuracy of temporal coding: Auditory-visual comparisons

Cited by 30 publications

References 42 publications

Distinctiveness revisited: Unpredictable temporal isolation does not benefit short-term serial recall of heard or seen events

Distinctiveness revisited: Unpredictable temporal isolation does not benefit short-term serial recall of heard or seen events

Modality, concreteness, and set-size effects in a free reconstruction of order task

Modality differences in short-term memory for rhythms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About