Repetition Deafness: Repeated Words in Computer-Compressed Speech Are                     Difficult to Encode and Recall

Miller, Michelle; MacKay, Donald G.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1994.tb00613.x

Cited by 36 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Any trials in which T1 and T2 had the same identity were removed prior to analysis to eliminate the potential for the repetition blindness effect to confound the results (e.g., Kanwisher, 1987;Miller & MacKay, 1994). Because of the two-alternative forced-choice (2AFC) nature of the auditory task and the independence of T1 and T2, half of the within-modality auditory trials were subject to removal.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-modality attentional blinks without preparatory task-set switching

Arnell

Larson

2002

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When two masked targets (T1 and T2), both requiring attention, are presented within half a second of each other, report of the second target is poor (Broadbent & Broadbent, 1987;Raymond, Shapiro, & Arnell, 1992). However, T2 report is good when T2 is presented more than half a second after T1 or when T1 does not require attention (Raymond et al., 1992). Raymond et al. (1992) named this pattern of results the attentional blink (AB). AB experiments require participants to make unspeeded responses after the presentation of all stimuli has ended. The fact that there is no need for on-line response selection has helped to convince many researchers that the AB results from relatively early processing limitations that occur before central (amodal) processing bottlenecks. In early AB experiments, only visual stimuli were used as targets and distractors, and these were often presented using the rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) technique in which letters or words appeared rapidly one at a time in the same spatial location. Owing to the use of visual stimuli and the assumption that the AB resulted from relatively early processing limitations, the visual nature of the stimuli and their processing became incorporated into various theories of the AB (e.g., Duncan, Ward, & Shapiro, 1994;Raymond et al., 1992;Raymond, Shapiro, & Arnell, 1995;Shapiro, Raymond, & Arnell, 1994;Ward, Duncan, & Shapiro, 1996). For example, in the attentional dwell time theory of Duncan et al. (1994) and Ward et al., the AB is taken as a measure of the time course of visual attention. Shapiro et al. (1994) and Raymond et al. (1995) explained the AB as the result of confusion in an overcrowded visual short-term memory.Arnell and Jolicoeur (1999) tested visual theories of the AB by having participants attend to concurrent but independent visual RSVP letter streams and to compressed speech rapid auditory presentation (RAP) streams. The participants were asked to report the identity of a T1 number and the presence or absence of a subsequent X. T1 modality (visual or auditory) was fully crossed with T2 modality (visual or auditory), producing two withinmodality conditions (both targets visual, both targets auditory) and two cross-modality conditions (T1 visual and T2 auditory, T1 auditory and T2 visual). One quarter of the participants received each modality combination. Arnell and Jolicoeur found a reliable AB in each of the four modality combinations. The ABs were larger for the visual T2 conditions than for the auditory T2 conditions,but the AB sizes in the within-modality conditions were roughly equal to the AB sizes in the cross-modality conditions. Arnell and Jolicoeur concluded that the AB is not a uniquely visual phenomenon. They argued that the robust ABs observed in the cross-modality conditions provided good evidence that central (amodal) processing limitations were responsible for the AB. Specifically, limitations on stimulus consolidationin working memory were proposed.Using a variety of presentation conditions, other researchers have a...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-modality attentional blinks without preparatory task-set switching

Arnell

Larson

2002

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, if a sentence is presented in which a word appears twice, subjects only mention the repeated word once when asked to reproduce the sentence. When information is presented verbally, the same phenomenon occurs (repetition deafness), but it is less pronounced and requires a faster repetition rate (Miller and MacKay 1994). Obviously, in normal speech, repetition of a number can usually be detected, possibly because the first and second presentation of the number are spoken differently and so can somehow be encoded as "different" items.…”

Section: Possible Explanation Of Repetition Blindnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Novel lists of 7 +/- 2 known items can be reliably stored in an oscillatory short-term memory network: interaction with long-term memory.

Jensen

Lisman²

1996

Learning & Memory

145

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper proposes a model for the short-term memory (STM) of unique fists of known items, as, for instance, a phone number. We show that the ability to accurately store such lists in STM depends strongly on interaction with the preexisting long-term memory (LTM) for individual items (e.g., digits). We have examined this interaction in computer simulations of a network based on physiologically realistic membrane conductances, synaptic plasticity processes, and brain oscillations. In the model, seven STMs can be kept active, each in a different gamma-frequency subcycle of a theta-frequency oscillation. Each STM is maintained and timed by an activity-dependent ramping process. LTM is stored by the strength of synapses in recurrent collaterals. The presence of preexisting LTM for an item greatly enhances the ability of the network to store an item in STM. Without LTM, the precise timing required to keep cells firing within a given gamma subcycle cannot be maintained and STM is gradually degraded. With LTM, timing errors can be corrected and the accuracy and order of items is maintained. This attractor property of STM storage is remarkable because it occurs even though there is no LTM that identifies which items are on the list or their order. Multiple known items can be stored in STM, even though their representation is 1Corresponding author.overlapping. However, multiple, identical memories cannot be stored in STM, consistent with the psychophysical demonstration of repetition blindness. Our results indicate that meaningful computation (memory completion) can occur in the millisecond range during an individual gamma cycle.

show abstract

“…Finally, RB has been shown to occur for letters, for pictures, for words and their corresponding pictures, and for words and their translation in another language (Bavelier, 1994;Kanwisher and Potter, 1990;MacKay and Miller, 1994). Phonology has also been reported to play a role in RB but phonological similarity by itself has been shown not to be a sufficient factor (Bavelier and Potter, 1992;Kanwisher, 1991; but see Miller and MacKay, 1994).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%