Reversing the picture superiority effect: A speed—accuracy trade-off study of recognition memory

Boldini, Angela; Russo, Riccardo; Punia, Sahiba; Avons, S. E.

doi:10.3758/bf03195948

Cited by 21 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The finding that images are generally better remembered than words, termed the picture superiority effect, has been well supported and replicated in the literature, consistent across various methodologies, paradigms, and demographic groups (Paivio et al, 1968;Rowe, 1972;Maisto & Queen, 1992;Paivio & Foth, 1970;Mintzer & Snodgrass, 1999;Kinjo & Snodgrass, 2000;Snodgrass & McLure, 1975;Hockley, 2008; but see Boldini, Russo, Punia, & Avons, 2007;Vaidya & Gabrieli, 2000;Weldon & Roediger, 1987). A c c e p t e d M a n u s c r i p t THE DRAWING EFFECT 7 Paivio's (1971;1991) dual-code theory suggests that pictures are better remembered than words because they are represented both visually and verbally.…”

mentioning

confidence: 86%

The drawing effect: Evidence for reliable and robust memory benefits in free recall

Wammes

Meade

Fernandes

2016

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

130

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 7 free-recall experiments, the benefit of creating drawings of to-be-remembered information relative to writing was examined as a mnemonic strategy. In Experiments 1 and 2, participants were presented with a list of words and were asked to either draw or write out each. Drawn words were better recalled than written. Experiments 3-5 showed that the memory boost provided by drawing could not be explained by elaborative encoding (deep level of processing, LoP), visual imagery, or picture superiority, respectively. In Experiment 6, we explored potential limitations of the drawing effect, by reducing encoding time and increasing list length. Drawing, relative to writing, still benefited memory despite these constraints. In Experiment 7, the drawing effect was significant even when encoding trial types were compared in pure lists between participants, inconsistent with a distinctiveness account. Together these experiments indicate that drawing enhances memory relative to writing, across settings, instructions, and alternate encoding strategies, both within- and between-participants, and that a deep LoP, visual imagery, or picture superiority, alone or collectively, are not sufficient to explain the observed effect. We propose that drawing improves memory by encouraging a seamless integration of semantic, visual, and motor aspects of a memory trace.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 86%

The drawing effect: Evidence for reliable and robust memory benefits in free recall

Wammes

Meade

Fernandes

2016

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

130

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Within such paradigms, the participants' stimulus processing is interrupted at different times after stimulus presentation (e.g., Boldini, Russo, & Avons, 2004;Boldini, Russo, Punia, & Avons, 2007;Corbett & Wickelgren, 1978;Dosher, 1981Dosher, , 1982Göthe & Oberauer, 2008;Kumar, Rakitin, Nambisan, Habeck, & Stern, 2008;Lohman, 1986;McElree & Dosher, 1989, 1993McElree, Plykkänen, Pickering, & Traxler, 2006;Miller, Sproesser, & Ulrich, 2008;Öztekin & McElree, 2006;Ratcliff, 2006;Reed, 1973;Schouten & Bekker, 1967). In this way, different intervals between stimulus presentation and the response signal can be used, allowing for an examination of the variation in the amount of processing that can occur before the response signal and, ultimately, the amount of accuracy associated with that amount of processing time.…”

Section: Studying Satsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The time course of task switching: A speed—accuracy trade-off analysis

Samavatyan

Leth‐Steensen

2009

Memory & Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Response time (RT) and accuracy are highly dependent (Pachella, 1974). Typically, more efficient information processing results in both decreases in RT and increases in accuracy. However, in any response process, an optimal balance of speed and accuracy can also be considered by the responder on the basis of the priorities of the current situation. The mutual dependence of RT and accuracy is evident when more emphasis on accuracy results in increases in RTs and when, conversely, more emphasis on speed (i.e., shorter RTs) causes accuracy to decrease. As was noted by Wickelgren (1977), the study of RTs in conjunction with accuracy (i.e., the whole speed-accuracy trade-off [SAT] function) has the potential to provide much greater knowledge about information processing dynamics than can the study of either the RT or accuracy aspects of performance separately.Switching between tasks results in costs in terms of both RT and accuracy (Monsell, 2003). A review of the influential studies in the task-switching area reveals that the issue of SATs and how corresponding speed-accuracy manipulations can affect task-switching performance has rarely been directly examined. One exception is Gopher, Armony, and Greenshpan (2000), whose major interest in SATs, however, involved a comparison of the costs associated with switching between tasks and the costs associated with switching between speed and accuracy strategy emphases. Another exception is Lien, Ruthruff, Remington, and Johnston (2005), involving time deadlines, which were utilized by Lien et al. in order to provide their participants with the strongest possible motivation for optimal performance. Studying SATsTrading off accuracy for speed or vice versa can be expected in presumably any task. Systematic experimental work on the phenomenon began in the 1950s and '60s (for a discussion of this work, see Wickelgren, 1977). The SAT paradigm in cognitive psychology addresses the inverse relationship between speed and accuracy (or, correspondingly, the positive relation between RTs and accuracy) by examining the process of information accumulation through time. In this way, an experimenter can observe how different methods of manipulation of speed emphasis result in changes in both the RTs and the accuracy of the responses. Under speed pressure, more incorrect responses are expected, and SAT curves can be derived to specify how much time is needed to achieve a particular accuracy level. This procedure was initially used by a few researchers in the 1970s (e.g., Reed, 1973Reed, , 1976) to study cognitive processing.One important method through which speed-accuracy performance can be explicitly manipulated is by using response signals. Within such paradigms, the participants' stimulus processing is interrupted at different times after stimulus presentation (e.g., Boldini, Russo, & Avons, 2004;Boldini, Russo, Punia, & Avons, 2007;Corbett & Wickelgren, 1978;Dosher, 1981Dosher, , 1982Göthe & Oberauer, 2008;Kumar, Rakitin, Nambisan, Habeck, & Stern, 2008;Lohman, 1986;McElree & Dosher,...

show abstract

“…For example, research on the picture superiority effect usually shows superior memory for pictures over words. However, with faster stimulus presentation rates or speeded response tasks, the effect can sometimes be eliminated or reversed (Boldini et al, 2007;Paivio & Csapo, 1969). The reason, according to dual-coding theory, is insufficient time to label the pictures.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, under some conditions, the picture superiority effect can be eliminated or reversed. For example, with serial recall tasks, words are sometimes recalled better than pictures, particularly when stimulus presentation rates are fast (Boldini, Russo, & Punia, 2007;Paivio & Csapo, 1969. More recently, experiments using implicit memory tasks (e.g., implicit category production) have sometimes eliminated the effect (Weldon & Coyote, 1996) or reversed it, producing a word superiority effect (Weldon & Roediger, 1987;Weldon, Roediger, & Challis, 1989).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%