Serial position effects in high-speed memory search

Effects of serial position and set size in auditory recognition memory

“…The presence in these auditory data of linear, parallel functions for positive and negative RTs with set size, along with effects of serial position, can be added to those data of Burrows and Okada (1971), who report similar paradoxical findings for visual presentations of lists and probes. The existence of serial position effects are counter to the Simplest notion of exhaustive search, while the similarity in slope constants would appear to argue against a serial self-terminating searchwhere "yes" responses would, on average, increase at half the rate of "no" responses.…”

“…Such findings might well reflect alternative search or rehearsal strategies when fixed or varying memory set sizes are encountered by Ss. The recent findings of Burrows and Okada (1971) of a cooccurrence of parallel slopes for "yes" and "no" responses and significant serial position effects, however, is intriguing. The present communication reports similar results for auditory presentation of both memory lists and probes, and also compares search rates obtained with those of previous Studies of rapid processing of temporarily held information soon after receipt, and prior to much memory decay, have received considerable attention in recent years.…”

Attentional refreshing of information in working memory: Increased immediate accessibility of just-refreshed representations

“…Finally, the current results also shed light on why some studies have observed a lastpresented benefit in the Sternberg item-recognition task, while others have not (e.g., Burrows & Okada, 1971;Clifton & Birenbaum, 1970;Donkin & Nosofsky, 2012;Nee & Jonides, 2008;Öztekin et al, 2010). Donkin and Nosofsky (2012) hinted at the possibility of maintenance processes taking place during and after list presentation, potentially altering the psychological recency of the memory items.…”

“…For example, in an item-recognition task in which a list of items is followed by a probe to be judged present in or absent from the list of items, it is typically observed that RTs to the last-presented item are faster than to any other item of the list (e.g., Burrows & Okada, 1971;McElree & Dosher, 1989;Nee & Jonides, 2008;Öztekin, Davachi, & McElree, 2010). The idea is that, at the end of the memory list, the final item is maintained in the focus of attention, resulting in speeded responses to probes that match that item.…”

Serial-position effects for lures in short-term recognition memory

“…If the study items are presented rapidly and the pause before the recognition probe is brief, however, there is a modest advantage for the first-presented item and a dramatic advantage for the final item (Burrows & Okada, 1971;Corballis, Kirby, & Miller, 1972;McElree & Dosher, 1989).…”