The effect of white noise upon the recall of vocalized lists.

Dj, Murray

doi:10.1037/h0082913

Cited by 58 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Such signals could differ from those available in the course of silent rehearsal in their intensity. Such a proposal is seemingly contradicted by an experiment of Murray (1965a) who showed that the overall advantage of vocalized rehearsal is negated in noise unless the volume of the vocalization is sufficient to overcome the noise and make the rehearsed items audible.…”

Section: Vocalization At Recallmentioning

confidence: 64%

Precategorical acoustic storage (PAS)

Crowder

Morton

1969

Perception & Psychophysics

740

594

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fig. I. An incomplete conceptual diagram of information flow in immediate memory tasks. No reference whatever to locations or pathways in the nervous system isimplied. PRELIMINARY DESCRIPTION OF THE MODELThe overall schema in which we are operating is given in Fig. I. Our preliminary assumptions are based on a clear distinction between information which has been categorized (i.e., identified or perceived) and information which has not been categorized. Like Tulving (1968) we see no defensible reason for distinguishing between perception and learning, with respect to individual elements. Once categorization has argument is, on the contrary, that PAS bears important qualitative similarities to the comparable precategorical storage system in vision (Sperling, 1963) though the relevant time parameters appear to be of different order of magnitude. While other writers (e.g., Mackworth, 1965;Neisser, 1967) have previously considered the existence of an acoustic-equivalent to the visual sensory store (and have suggested longer duration in the case of audition than in vision) there has been no comprehensive attempt to make explicit the properties of such a store. In considering these properties, our main objective has been to give an explanation for various serial position data which have been reported in immediate memory. Although the system is in this sense ad hoc it leads readily to a number of testable implications, two of which were confirmed in the experiments reported herein. We shall first describe the PAS system and its properties; second, review the evidence in its favor from both our laboratory and others'; and finally, suggest the relation of the model to a general approach to memory theory.

show abstract

Section: Vocalization At Recallmentioning

confidence: 64%

Precategorical acoustic storage (PAS)

Crowder

Morton

1969

Perception & Psychophysics

740

594

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2C), even though reading aloud and whispering involve processing along the same dimensions. Interestingly, Murray (1965aMurray ( , 1965bMurray ( , 1966) also demonstrated a spoken > whispered > silent vocalization gradient, in his case in short-term serial recall. Although, like normal speaking, whispering words also entails auditory processing, having read words aloud is more memorable, possibly because normal speech involves the production of a stronger auditory signal than does whispering, which requires more "active" encoding.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Widening the boundaries of the production effect

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Words that are read aloud are more memorable than words that are read silently. The boundaries of this production effect (MacLeod, Gopie, Hourihan, Neary, & Ozubko, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 671-685, 2010) have been found to extend beyond speech. MacLeod and colleagues demonstrated that mouthing also facilitates memory, leading them to speculate that any distinct, item-specific response should result in a production effect. In Experiment 1, we found support for this conjecture: Relative to silent reading, three unique productions-spelling, writing, and typingall boosted explicit memory. In Experiment 2, we tested the sensitivity of the production effect. Although mouthing, writing, and whispering all improved explicit memory when compared to silent reading, these other production modalities were not as beneficial as speech. We argue that the enhanced distinctiveness of speech relative to other productions-and of other productions relative to silent readingunderlies this pattern of results.

show abstract

“…For recency items, mouthing sometimes produced higher recall than silent reading (Green & Crowder, 1986;Nairne & Walters, 1983), but it never resulted in recall as high as when the subjects vocalized audibly. Further evidence that the auditory feedback is critical and not feedback from the articulatory activity was provided by Murray (1965), who found that the beneficial effects of vocalization were reduced if the subject's voice was masked by white noise. Crowder (1986) also reported that white noise reduced recall when subjects whispered visually presented words during their presentation.…”

Section: Modality Effects In Stm 411mentioning

confidence: 99%

Modality effects and the structure of short-term verbal memory

1989

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of auditory and visual presentation upon short-term retention of verbal stimuli are reviewed, and a model of the structure of short-term memory is presented. The main assumption of the model is that verbal information presented to the auditory and visual modalities is processed in separate streams that have different properties and capabilities. Auditory items are automatically encoded in both the A (acoustic) code, which, in the absence of subsequent input, can be maintained for some time without deliberate allocation of attention, and a P (phonological) code. Visual items are retained in both the P code and a visual code. Within the auditory stream, successive items are strongly associated; in contrast, in the visual modality, it is simultaneously presented items that are strongly associated. These assumptions about the structure of shortterm verbal memory are shown to account for many of the observed effects of presentation modality. Penney (1975) reviewed the literature on the effects of presentation modality on short-term retention of verbal material and concluded that there were separate stores for auditorily and visually presented information. To emphasize the idea that active processing underlies retention in short-term memory, and to discourage the conceptualization of short-term memory as a warehouse of decaying information, Penney (1980) introduced the term separate processing streams to replace the notion of separate memory stores. Since publication of the review paper, additional work on modality effects has supported the hypothesis of modality separation in the processing of verbal material in short-term memory (the separate-streams hypothesis), and new findings have elucidated the nature of the separate processing streams. The present paper is a review of the literature on modality effects and related phenomena, with the goal of presenting an integrated account in terms of the different properties and capabilities of the separate processing streams. These processing streams are seen to reflect the inherent structure of short-term verbal memory, and not to represent strategic processes.In 1975, the term modality effect referred to the finding that, in short-term memory tasks, auditory presentation almost always resulted in higher recall than did visual presentation. This modality effect was found for the recency part of the serial position curve in immediate free recall and in serial recall, and the auditory superiority was also found in the Peterson distractor task, provided that I would like to thank Donald Broadbent, Robert Crowder, Susan Manning, Bennet Murdock, James Nairne, Lars-Goran Nilsson, Charles Thompson, and Michael Watkins for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of the paper. Reprint requests may be addressed to the author, Psychology Department, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland AlB 3X9, Canada. the distraction did not require a long period of vocalization. Overt vocalization of a visually presented list by the subject produced much the sa...

show abstract

The effect of white noise upon the recall of vocalized lists.

Cited by 58 publications

References 17 publications

Precategorical acoustic storage (PAS)

Precategorical acoustic storage (PAS)

Widening the boundaries of the production effect

Modality effects and the structure of short-term verbal memory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About