Search

Recent studies of short-term serial order memory have suggested that the maintenance of order information does not involve domain-specific processes. We carried out two dual-task experiments aimed at resolving several ambiguities in those studies. In our experiments, encoding and response of one serial reconstruction task was embedded within encoding and response of a concurrent serial reconstruction task. Order demands in both tasks were independently varied so as to find revealing patterns of interference between the two tasks. In Experiment 1, participants were to maintain and reconstruct the order of a list of verbal materials, while maintaining a list of spatial materials or vice-versa. Increasing the order demands in the outer reconstruction task resulted in small or non-reliable performance decrements in the embedded reconstruction task. Experiment 2 sought to compare these results against two same-domain baseline conditions (two verbal lists or two spatial lists). In all conditions, increasing order demands in the outer task resulted in small or non-reliable performance decrements in the embedded task. However, performance in the embedded tasks was generally lower in the same-domain baseline conditions than in the cross-domain conditions. We argue that the main effect of domain in Experiment 2 indicates the contribution of domain-specific processes to short-term serial order maintenance. In addition, we interpret the failure to find consistent cross-list interference irrespective of domain as indicating the involvement of grouping mechanisms in concurrently performed serial order tasks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In working memory (WM) span tests participants have to maintain to-be-remembered information while processing other, potentially distracting, information. Previous studies have shown that WM span scores are greater when span lists start with a long processing task and end with a short processing task than when these processing tasks are presented in the reverse order (e.g., Towse, Hitch, & Hutton, 2000). In Experiment 1, we obtained a similar stimulus order effect in a reasoning span test, using reasoning sentences that were equated for length in terms of the number of constituent words, but which differed in processing complexity; span scores were greater when lists began with a complex sentence and ended with a simple sentence than when this stimulus order was reversed. In Experiment 2, the stimulus order effect was not found when processing duration was held constant while sentence complexity was varied using a computer-paced moving window presentation paradigm. These results suggest that duration-based constraints can affect degree of forgetting independently of the load generated during processing phases in WM span performance and therefore imply that time-related forgetting can occur in WM span tests, particularly when the difficulty of the processing component blocks active maintenance of to-be-remembered material. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Hebb repetition effect on serial-recall task refers to the improvement in the accuracy of recall of a repeated list (e.g., repeated in every 3 trials) over random non-repeated lists. Previous research has shown that both temporal position and neighboring items need to be the same on each repetition list for the Hebb repetition effect to occur, suggesting chunking as one of its underlying mechanisms. Accordingly, one can expect absence of the Hebb repetition effect in a complex span task, given that the sequence is interrupted by distractors. Nevertheless, one study by Oberauer, Jones, and Lewandowsky (2015, Memory & Cognition, 43[6], 852–865) showed evidence of the Hebb repetition effect in a complex span task. Throughout four experiments, we confirmed the Hebb repetition effect in complex span tasks, even when we included distractors in both encoding and recall phases to avoid any resemblance to a simple span task and minimized the possibility of chunking. Results showed that the Hebb repetition effect was not affected by the distractors during encoding and recall. A transfer cycle analysis showed that the long-term knowledge acquired in the complex span task can be transferred to a simple span task. These findings provide the first insights on the mechanism behind the Hebb repetition effect in complex span tasks; it is at least partially based on the same mechanism that improves recall performance by repetition in simple span tasks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Hebb repetition effect is a phenomenon in which a repeated presentation of the same list increases the performance in immediate serial recall. This provided the theoretical basis for a core assumption of the Atkinson and Shiffrin model regarding information transfer from short-term memory to long-term memory. The Hebb repetition effect was originally reported for the verbal domain, but subsequent studies found similar phenomena using visuospatial paradigms, for example, in serial-order memory for dot locations. The present study examined in two experiments the effects of presentation timing of nine spatial locations on Hebb repetition learning. In Experiment 1, the Hebb repetition effects were observed for spatial locations with constant timing presentation as well as temporal grouping presentation. In the latter condition, all lists were presented with the same temporal structure, that is, temporal pauses were inserted after the third and sixth serial positions. This manipulation led to a better recall performance in comparison with the constant presentation, but did not interact with the repetition. In Experiment 2, the Hebb list was presented with a different temporal structure in every repetition in the random-grouping condition. Although this manipulation is known to eliminate or weaken the Hebb effect in the verbal domain, we observed stable repetition effects in this experiment. This suggests that there might be some domain-specific mechanisms in Hebb repetition learning. These results may facilitate the development of theories of the relationship between short-term and long-term memory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To complete complex tasks, individuals must actively maintain task rules to direct behavior correctly. Failure to use task rules appropriately, termed goal neglect, has been shown across both vocal and manual response modalities. However, previous goal maintenance studies have differed not only in the response modality that they require, but also in the complexity of the stimulus-response mappings that participants must use during the task. The present study examines the effects of both response modality and stimulus-response mapping complexity, separately, on the rate of goal neglect in a modification of a classic goal maintenance task. Seventy-two younger adults were administered a shape-monitoring task, with three between-subjects response conditions: a vocal response with a simple stimulus-response mapping, a vocal response with a complex stimulus-response mapping, and a manual response with a complex stimulus-response mapping. Contrasting the rate at which task rules were neglected between response conditions showed that participants using complex stimulus-response mappings committed more frequent goal neglect than those using simple mappings, but that participants using vocal or manual responses did not differ in their rate of goal neglect once both responses required complex mappings. This suggests that the need to represent novel and complex stimulus-response mappings, of any modality, at the same time as novel task rules within working memory leads to some task rules being insufficiently maintained. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]