Variation in task complexity and adult age differences in frequency-of-occurrence judgments

Kausler, Donald H.; Wright, Ruth E.; Hakami, Malekeh K.

doi:10.3758/bf03333601

Cited by 15 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Altogether, the results are quite clear: The heavier the load of the competing task, the worse the performance on the frequency judgment task by any of the measures used. The encoding of frequency information is affected by competing task demands in line with Kausler et al's (1981) study. This result is not consistent with the claim that frequency coding is automatic.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 58%

“…There is another report of an experiment measuring the effect of competing task demands on frequency judgments whose results do not support the automaticity contention. In this experiment, by Kausler, Wright, and Hakami (1981), judgments about frequency were obtained under two conditions. In one, subjects were asked to prepare for just an upcoming frequency judgment task.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On the automaticity of frequency coding: Effects of competing task load, encoding strategy, and intention.

Naveh–Benjamin

Jonides²

1986

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two criteria of central importance to the identification of an automatic process are insensitivity to competing task loads and to strategy manipulation. Past experimentation using these criteria has led to the view that judgments of frequency of occurrence are a result of an automatic process. Experiment I is a reexamination of the effect of competing load. This experiment's results make clear that judgments of frequency are markedly affected by the level of difficulty of a secondary task. Results from Experiment 2 suggest that although intention to code frequency may not have an effect on frequency judgments under all conditions, there are strategic effects on coding nonetheless. Finally, Experiment 3 is included to show that under some conditions, in fact, one can find an effect of intention as well. Taken together, the results that are reported question the view that frequency judgments are the result of an automatic process.We thank G. Logan and F. Durso for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this article. We would also like to thank Joanne Alexander and Dorit Lavi-Tubin for their help in data collection and analysis.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 58%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

On the automaticity of frequency coding: Effects of competing task load, encoding strategy, and intention.

Naveh–Benjamin

Jonides²

1986

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The only other criterion that has received a large amount of empirical study states that there should be no developmental trends. Some studies have found a null effect of age (e.g., Attig & Hasher, 1980; Hasher & Chromiak, 1977; Hasher & Zacks, 1979, Experiment 1; Kausler & Puckett, 1980), but others have found strong effects of age on memory for frequency (Ghatala & Levin, 1973; Johnson, Raye, Hasher, & Chromiak, 1979; Kausler et al, 1984; Kausler, Wright, & Hakami, 1981, Lund, Hall, Wilson, & Humphreys, 1983, Warren & Mitchell, 1980). There is no obvious way to resolve the discrepancies in these studies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of intentionality and strategy on memory for frequency.

Greene¹

1986

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several recent studies have examined whether subjects who learn a list of words incidentally remember frequency as well as those who learn the words intentionally. Conflicting results have been found. This study demonstrates that the instructions play a crucial mediating role. Intentional-learning subjects exhibit an advantage in memory for frequency only if the instructions emphasize the importance of good performance on the memory task. Additional experiments show that intentionality influences memory for frequency within a list of items and that a strategy that involves semantic processing leads to improved frequency estimation. These results are inconsistent with current formulations of the claim that frequency information is encoded automatically.One of the most influential hypotheses made in recent years about memory for event frequency was suggested by Zacks (1979, 1984), who argued that frequency information is encoded automatically or effortlessly. It has long been known that people are very sensitive to differences in frequency of occurrence (Attneave, 1953). Hasher and Zacks (1979) proposed a set of additional criteria for determining whether a particular kind of information is encoded automatically. The criterion that has received the greatest empirical attention states that intentionality of learning should have no effect on memory performance for that information. It has been demonstrated by a large number of different investigators (e.g.,

show abstract

“…To date, only the study by Zacks et al (1982, Experiment 3) has found frequency processing accuracy to be immune to interference from concurrent, effortful processing. The remaining studies (Fisk & Schneider, 1984;Kausler. Wright, & Hakami, 1981;Naveh-Benjamin & Jonides, 1986) have all found frequency performance to decrease as concurrent processing capacity demands increased, although there are grounds for arguing that the results of these studies are not completely convincing.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In both the Kausler et al (1981) and Naveh-Benjamin and Jonides (1986) assessments of the interference criterion, subjects' primary task involved the intentional processing of frequency information. Accordingly, Hasher and Zacks' boundary condition regarding attention to task materials was clearly met and, taken together, these studies show that concurrent effortful processing can interfere with the efficiency of intentional frequency encoding.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Frequency of occurrence and the criteria for automatic processing.

Sanders

Gonzalez²,

Murphy³

et al. 1987

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three experiments were conducted to assess the automaticity of event frequency processing. Using a modified concept-learning task, Experiment 1 showed that intentional frequency processing led to more accurate frequency judgments than incidental processing. Experiment 2 demonstrated that nonspecific (general memory) instructions in incidental processing conditions can actually lead to subjects' intentional processing of frequency information, which undermines the effectiveness of an intentionality manipulation. And, in Experiment 3, frequency processing accuracy was found to be interfered with by concurrent cover task capacity requirements, even though frequency processing occurred incidentally. The findings that frequency judgment is influenced by intentionality and by concurrent task factors clearly violate two of Hasher and Zacks ' (1979,1984) empirical criteria used to define automatic processing; they also challenge the assumption that automatic processing is always optimal. In light of our and others' data, either event frequency, the prototypical automatic process, is not automatic, or the assumption that a process must be optimal if it is to be considered automatic must be dropped. We suggest a less extreme view of automaticity such that nonconscious processes requiring minimal cognitive resources would be considered automatic, even if performance is not optimal.

show abstract

Variation in task complexity and adult age differences in frequency-of-occurrence judgments

Cited by 15 publications

References 5 publications

On the automaticity of frequency coding: Effects of competing task load, encoding strategy, and intention.

On the automaticity of frequency coding: Effects of competing task load, encoding strategy, and intention.

Effects of intentionality and strategy on memory for frequency.

Frequency of occurrence and the criteria for automatic processing.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About