Effects of Difficulty Variables and Type of Suffix on Serial Recall

Manning, Susan Karp

doi:10.2307/1422548

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Standard auditory stimuli apparently have such distinctiveness to a greater degree than do standard graphic stimuli. However, with effort one can lessen or elintinate auditory recency by changing this variable in a variety of ways-for example, by reducing set size (see Manning, 1984, for a discussion of situations in which this may have happened) or increasing stimulus confusability (see Darwin & Baddeley, 1974). Similarly, one can increase graphic recency and, in fact, totally eliminate the modality effect by making a fmal item sufficiently distinctive (Routh & Frosdick, 1978).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attentional control of visual suffix effects

Manning

1987

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An experiment was performed to compare the effects of an attentional manipulation and four suffix conditions on the recall of auditorily presented numerical sequences. In the nonattention condition, in which a suffix was described as a recall cue, spoken suffixes produced large end-ofsequence performance decrements; lipread suffixes produced similar, although smaller, effects. Suffixes "drawn" through the air on a card background (drawn) and those printed on a card (graphic) led to no significant end-of-sequence effects. In the attention condition, a suffix-prefix (the subject recalled the suffix, which was either 0 or 9, before commencing recall) was used to compel attention. The attentional manipulation led to changes in performance on sequences having lipread or drawn suffixes but not for those having graphic or spoken suffixes. The finding that attentional factors affect the size of lipread but not spoken end-of-sequence suffix effects suggests differences between auditory and visual suffix effects. Similarly, the differences in preterminal suffix effects resulting from the attentional manipulation suggest differences among various visual stimuli in sensitivity to generalized interference.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attentional control of visual suffix effects

Manning

1987

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The suffix effect is usually studied in auditory short-term memory. The auditory suffix impairs recall as much as if it were another to-be-recalled item (Dallet, 1964; Manning, 1984; Penney, 1978), suggesting that subjects do not exclude the auditory suffix from either auditory short-term memory or from a smaller capacity short-term store which is hypothesized to retain the last few items of an auditory presentation (Crowder & Morton, 1969; Morton, Crowder & Prussin, 1971). The auditory suffix creates a delay between the presentation and the response and might interrupt attention to the to-be-recalled items.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The suffix effect and preattentive unit-formation in visual short-term memory.

Frick¹,

Rose²

1986

Canadian Journal of Psychology / Revue canadienne de psychologi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Immediate ordered recall of digits from visual short-term memory was tested, primarily using a long-exposure (approximately 3^ sec) visual presentation during which subjects spoke aloud (articulatory suppression). A to-be-ignored digit placed to the right of the visual presentation, called a suffix, impaired recall approximately one digit, suggesting that the suffix could not be excluded from visual short-term memory. The suffix effect was attenuated when the suffix was segregated from the to-be-recallcd digits by Gcstalt principles of grouping, suggesting that a segregated suffix could be excluded from visual short-term memory. The results suggest that the visual field is organized into units preattentively according to Gestalt principles of grouping and that when a unit (such as a string of digits) is selected, the entire unit enters visual short-term memory. RESUME Le rappel en ordre et immediat de chiffres de la memoire visuelle a court terme est evalue en utilisant une presentation visuelle de longue duree (environ 3-4 sec) au cours de laquelle les participants partent a haute voix (suppression articulatoire). Un chiffre qui doit etre ignore, place a droite de la presentation visuelle, et appelc suffixc, nuit au rappel d'environ un chiffre. Ce resultat suggere que le suffixe ne peut etre exclu de la memoire visuelle a court terme. On parvient a attenuer cet effet en isolant le suffixe des chiffres a se rappeler grace aux principes gestaltiques du regroupement. Les resultats suggerent que le champ visuel est organise en unites de facon preattentive selon les principes gestaltiques de regroupement. Aussi, quand une unite (tellc unc suite de chiffres) est selectionnee, l'unite entiere entre dans la memoire visuelle a court terme.

show abstract

“…In a similar spirit, Crowder (1978,1983) has proposed a metaphor in which PAS interference is seen as lateral inhibition among items represented in a multidimensional space, where such characteristics as voice quality, spatial location, and time define the relevant axes or channels (see also Deutsch, 1972). The addition of channels to the model has the advantage of potentially accommodating results, showing that some manipulations of list/suffix acoustic similarity do not change the size of the suffix effect, presumably because some manipulations are not salient bases for channel segregation (Manning, 1984). Even the original proposal of the PAS included the possibility of attentional selection prior to entry in the auditory storage (Morton et al, 1971).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Recognition of the stimulus suffix

Ayres

Naveh–Benjamin

Jonides

1986

Journal of Memory and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recall of the final items in a spoken list is hindered by the presentation of a to-be-ignored item. The magnitude of this interference (the stimulus suffix effect) is reduced if the suffix is perceptually distinct from the other list items. Several experiments examine this effect of perceptual distinctiveness. The experiments involve later recognition of stimulus suffixes from lists presented for serial recall. Suffixes which differ from the list items tend to be recognized at least as well as list-similar sufftxes. This supports the view that reduction of the suffix effect can be traced to decreased interitem interference in memory rather than to attentional selection.

show abstract

Effects of Difficulty Variables and Type of Suffix on Serial Recall

Cited by 8 publications

References 15 publications

Attentional control of visual suffix effects

Attentional control of visual suffix effects

The suffix effect and preattentive unit-formation in visual short-term memory.

Recognition of the stimulus suffix

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About