Valence and concreteness in item recognition: Evidence against the affective embodiment account.

The Affective Embodiment Account posits that sensorimotor interactions play an important role in learning and processing concrete words whereas experiences from emotional states play an important role in learning and processing abstract words. Because of this, there should be greater enhancement of valence for abstract than for concrete words and therefore there should be an interaction between valence and concreteness. Although this prediction has been observed in a number of tasks, very few studies have looked specifically at memory. Three experiments are reported that assess whether valence interacts with concreteness in recognition. In Experiment 1, recognition of concrete words was better than abstract, but there was no difference as a function of whether the words were positive or negative and there was no interaction. Experiment 2 compared positive and neutral words and Experiment 3 compared negative and neutral words; in both, there was a concreteness effect but no effect of valence and no interaction. These results replicate previous findings that when positive and negative words are equated more fully, valence has no effect on recognition, and also suggest a limit on the scope of the Affective Embodiment Account.

Valence does not affect serial recall.

Despite being the prototypical test of short-term/working memory, immediate serial recall is affected by numerous lexical and long-term memory factors. Within this large literature, very few studies have examined whether performance on the task is affected by valence, the extent to which a word is viewed as positive or negative. Whereas the NEVER model (Bowen, Kark, & Kensinger, 2018) makes the general prediction that negative words will be remembered better than positive words, two previous studies using serial recall have reported that positive words are better remembered than negative words. Three experiments reassessed whether valence affects immediate serial recall using stimuli equated on multiple dimensions, including both arousal and dominance. Over the 3 experiments, with 3 different sets of stimuli, we found no differences in either accuracy or various error measures as a function of valence. The data suggest that there is no effect of valence on an immediate serial recall task when potentially confounding dimensions are controlled. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Testing a Strategy-Disruption Account of the List-Strength Effect.

Presenting items multiple times on a study list increases their memorability, a process known as item strengthening. The list-strength effect (LSE) refers to the finding that, compared to unstrengthened (pure) lists, lists for which a subset of the items have been strengthened produce enhanced memory for the strengthened items and depressed memory for the unstrengthened items. Although the LSE is found in free recall (Tulving & Hastie, 1972), it does not occur in recognition (Ratcliff et al., 1990). In free recall, the LSE in mixed lists is attributed to a sampling bias promoting priority recall of strong items and consequent output interference affecting weak items. We suggest that, in recognition, the disruption of this pattern through the randomization of test probes is responsible for the null LSE. We present several pilot experiments consistent with this account; however, the registered experiment, which had more statistical power, did not support this account.

The list-length effect occurs in cued recall with the retroactive design but not the proactive design.

An ongoing debate in the memory literature concerns whether the list-length effect (better memory for short lists compared with long lists) exists in item recognition (Annis, Lenes, Westfall, Criss, & Malmberg, 2015; Dennis, Lee, & Kinnell, 2008). This debate was initiated when Dennis and Humphreys (2001) showed that, when confounds present in earlier list-length experiments were controlled, the list-length effect disappeared. The issue has yet to be settled. Interestingly, the same confounds present in recognition experiments exist in cued-recall experiments. Here, we implemented Dennis and Humphreys' (2001) methodological controls to test for the list-length effect in cued recall. In Experiment 1, we found a robust list-length effect when start-of-study items from the long list were tested. However, no list-length effect was found in Experiments 2 and 3 when end-of-study items from the long list were tested. These results are consistent with the view that cued recall is susceptible to retroactive interference but not proactive interference, a position supported by early interference work (e.g., Lindauer, 1968; Melton & von Lackum, 1941). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Short- and long-term memory tasks predict working memory performance, and vice versa.

The Brown-Peterson, operation span, and continual distractor tasks all require people to retain information while performing a distractor task. Scale Independent Memory, Perception, and Learning (SIMPLE), a local relative distinctiveness model, has been fit to aspects of each task and offers the same explanation for each: the distractor task serves to space the items out in time and memory performance depends on the relative distinctiveness of the target item at the time of recall. If this is correct, it follows that performance on all three tasks should correlate, even though the tasks have, at various times, been ascribed to different memory systems, short-term memory, working memory, and long-term memory, respectively. We tested 190 subjects on all three tasks and found that performance on all three tasks is significantly correlated. We then fit the data from each task using SIMPLE. We argue that these results support the relative distinctiveness principle (Surprenant & Neath, 2009). We contrast SIMPLE with other models of the same tasks. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Does the isolation effect require attention?

An item that differs from the surrounding items is remembered better than an item that is consistent with its surroundings; this is known as the von Restorff effect or isolation effect (von Restorff, Psychologische Forschung, 18, 299-342, 1933). Theoretical explanations have proposed that the isolate is processed differently from control items, though some research has suggested that this processing might require more attention for semantic than for physical isolates. To test this possibility, in the present study we examined the isolation effects for physical isolates and semantic isolates under full and divided attention. Participants viewed lists of categorized words, with some lists containing either a physical or a semantic isolate, followed by immediate written free recall. Across three experiments, divided attention eliminated the semantic isolation effect but did not impact the physical isolation effect. Furthermore, semantic isolates were output earlier in recall than controls, whereas physical isolates were output more similarly to controls. These findings suggest that semantic isolation effects require attention during encoding, whereas physical isolation effects are relatively automatic.

From Brown-Peterson to continual distractor via operation span: A SIMPLE account of complex span.

Three memory tasks-Brown-Peterson, complex span, and continual distractor-all alternate presentation of a to-be-remembered item and a distractor activity, but each task is associated with a different memory system, short-term memory, working memory, and long-term memory, respectively. SIMPLE, a relative local distinctiveness model, has previously been fit to data from both the Brown-Peterson and continual distractor tasks; here we use the same version of the model to fit data from a complex span task. Despite the many differences between the tasks, including unpredictable list length, SIMPLE fit the data well. Because SIMPLE posits a single memory system, these results constitute yet another demonstration that performance on tasks originally thought to tap different memory systems can be explained without invoking multiple memory systems.

Does working memory change with age? The interactions of concurrent articulation with the effects of word length and acoustic confusion.

The effects of acoustic confusion (phonological similarity), word length, and concurrent articulation (articulatory suppression) are cited as support for Working Memory's phonological loop component (e.g., Baddeley, 2000 , Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 7, 544). Research has focused on younger adults, with no studies examining whether concurrent articulation reduces the word length and acoustic confusion effects among older adults. In the current study, younger and older adults were given lists of similar and dissimilar letters (Experiment 1) or long and short words (Experiment 2) for immediate serial reconstruction of order. Items were presented visually or auditorily, with or without concurrent articulation. As expected, younger and older adults demonstrated effects of acoustic confusion, word length, and concurrent articulation. Further, concurrent articulation reduced the effects of acoustic confusion and word length equally for younger and older adults. This suggests that age-related differences occur in overall performance, but do not reflect an age-related deficiency in the functioning of the phonological loop component of working memory.

The effect of perceptual cues on inhibiting irrelevant information in older adults using a list-learning method.

UNLABELLED: BACKGROUND/STUDY CONTEXT: The inhibitory deficit hypothesis (Hasher & Zacks, 1988 , The Psychology of Learning and Motivation: Advances in Research and Theory, 22, 193-225) suggests that older adults are more susceptible to interference from irrelevant information because of age-related declines in inhibitory ability. Reading comprehension tasks have found that this deficit can be overcome by salient perceptual cues used to accentuate relevant information (Carlson, Hasher, Connelly, & Zacks, 1995 , Psychology and Aging, 10, 427-436). This study examined the ability of older adults to use perceptual cues to aid inhibition in list-learning tasks. METHODS: Sixteen younger (18-24 years of age) and sixteen older (62-79 years of age) adults were asked to remember/ignore presented items based on a pre- or posttrial perceptual cue (i.e., red or green font designated item relevance before or after each trial). The to-be-ignored stimuli could be pseudo-words or words taken from the same word pool as the relevant items. A repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was done to examine age-related differences in recognition of to-be-remembered items. RESULTS: As expected, younger adults showed better performance than older adults when item relevance was designated posttrial. Most importantly, pretrial perceptual cues eliminated age-related differences in performance when the task-irrelevant stimuli were pseudo-words, but not when they were words from the same word pool as the task-relevant stimuli. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that perceptual cues are not reliably sufficient to overcome inhibitory deficits in older adults, and that older adults may continue to process irrelevant information, leading to declines in task performance. This warrants further investigation regarding the extent to which relevant and irrelevant items must be distinguishable, perceptually or semantically, in order to aid inhibitory ability in older adults.

Backward recall and the word length effect.

The word length effect, the finding that words that have fewer syllables are recalled better than otherwise comparable words that have more syllables, is one of the benchmark effects that must be accounted for in any model of serial recall, and simulation models of immediate memory rely heavily on the finding. However, previous research has shown that the effect disappears when participants are asked to recall the items in strict backward order. The present 2 experiments replicate and extend that finding by manipulating the participant's foreknowledge of recall direction (Experiment 1) and by giving the participant repeated practice with one direction by blocking recall direction (Experiment 2). In both experiments, a word length effect obtained with forward but not backward recall. The results are problematic for all models that currently have an a priori explanation for word length effects. The finding can be accounted for but is not predicted by Scale-Independent Memory, Perception, and Learning (SIMPLE), a model in which item and order information are differentially attended to in the 2 recall directions.

When does length cause the word length effect?

The word length effect, the finding that lists of short words are better recalled than lists of long words, has been termed one of the benchmark findings that any theory of immediate memory must account for. Indeed, the effect led directly to the development of working memory and the phonological loop, and it is viewed as the best remaining evidence for time-based decay. However, previous studies investigating this effect have confounded length with orthographic neighborhood size. In the present study, Experiments 1A and 1B revealed typical effects of length when short and long words were equated on all relevant dimensions previously identified in the literature except for neighborhood size. In Experiment 2, consonant-vowel-consonant (CVC) words with a large orthographic neighborhood were better recalled than were CVC words with a small orthographic neighborhood. In Experiments 3 and 4, using two different sets of stimuli, we showed that when short (1-syllable) and long (3-syllable) items were equated for neighborhood size, the word length effect disappeared. Experiment 5 replicated this with spoken recall. We suggest that the word length effect may be better explained by the differences in linguistic and lexical properties of short and long words rather than by length per se. These results add to the growing literature showing problems for theories of memory that include decay offset by rehearsal as a central feature.

Backward recall and benchmark effects of working memory.

Working memory was designed to explain four benchmark memory effects: the word length effect, the irrelevant speech effect, the acoustic confusion effect, and the concurrent articulation effect. However, almost all research thus far has used tests that emphasize forward recall. In four experiments, we examine whether each effect is observable when the items are recalled in reverse order. Subjects did not know which recall direction would be required until the time of test, ensuring that encoding processes would be identical for both recall directions. Contrary to predictions of both the primacy model and the feature model, the benchmark memory effect was either absent or greatly attenuated with backward recall, despite being present with forward recall. Direction of recall had no effect on the more difficult conditions (e.g., long words, similar-sounding items, items presented with irrelevant speech, and items studied with concurrent articulation). Several factors not considered by the primacy and feature models are noted, and a possible explanation within the framework of the SIMPLE model is briefly presented.

Irrelevant tapping and the acoustic confusion effect: the effect of spatial complexity.

When items in a to-be-remembered list sound similar, recall performance is worse than when items are acoustically distinct, what is known as the acoustic confusion effect (ACE). When participants are asked to tap a syncopated rhythm during list presentation, the difference between the acoustically similar and dissimilar conditions is abolished; however, simple temporal and simple spatial tapping tasks have no effect. The objective of the present study is to examine whether spatial complexity is a property of the tapping task that interferes with the ACE. Participants were asked to tap a simple (Experiment 1) or a complex spatial pattern (Experiment 2) at a regular pace during a verbal serial recall task in which acoustic similarity was manipulated. The results showed that simple spatial tapping had no effect on the ACE, whereas complex spatial tapping significantly reduced the effect. Implications for three theories of memory are discussed.

Irrelevant speech effects and statistical learning.

Immediate serial recall of visually presented verbal stimuli is impaired by the presence of irrelevant auditory background speech, the so-called irrelevant speech effect. Two of the three main accounts of this effect place restrictions on when it will be observed, limiting its occurrence either to items processed by the phonological loop (the phonological loop hypothesis) or to items that are not too dissimilar from the irrelevant speech (the feature model). A third, the object-oriented episodic record (O-OER) model, requires only that the memory task involves seriation. The present studies test these three accounts by examining whether irrelevant auditory speech will interfere with a task that does not involve the phonological loop, does not use stimuli that are compatible with those to be remembered, but does require seriation. Two experiments found that irrelevant speech led to lower levels of performance in a visual statistical learning task, offering more support for the O-OER model and posing a challenge for the other two accounts.

Directly assessing the relationship between irrelevant speech and irrelevant tapping.

The acoustic confusion effect is the finding that lists of to-be-remembered items that sound similar to one another are recalled worse than otherwise comparable lists of items that sound different. Previous work has shown that concurrent irrelevant speech and concurrent irrelevant tapping both reduce the size of this effect, suggesting similarities between the two manipulations. The authors assessed the relation between irrelevant speech and irrelevant tapping by correlating the disruption each causes to recall of similar- and dissimilar-sounding items. A significant correlation was obtained, indicating a relation between the two. The results indicate that researchers should be sensitive to changes in the magnitude of the effects rather than focusing exclusively on the presence or absence of particular effects. Implications for the 3 major explanations of the irrelevant speech effect are discussed.

Age-related differences in the von restorff isolation effect.

When one item is made distinct from the other items in a list, memory for the distinctive item is improved, a finding known as the isolation or von Restorff effect (after von Restorff, 1933). Although demonstrated numerous times with younger adults and children, this effect has not been found with older adults (Cimbalo & Brink, 1982). In contrast to the earlier study, we obtained a significant von Restorff effect for both younger and older adults using a physical manipulation of font colour. The effect size for older adults was smaller than that obtained for younger adults, confirming a prediction of Naveh-Benjamin's (2000) associative deficit hypothesis, which attributes age-related differences in memory performance to older adults' reduced ability to form associations. The findings are consistent with related research in which older adults demonstrate similar--but smaller--benefits for distinctive information to those for younger adults.

The syllable-based word length effect and stimulus set specificity.

The word length effect is the finding that a list of items that take less time to pronounce is better recalled on an immediate serial recall test than an otherwise equivalent list of items that take more time to pronounce. Contrary to the predictions of all major models of the word length effect, Hulme, Suprenant, Bireta, Stuart, and Neath (2004) found that short and long items presented within the same list were recalled equally as well as short items presented in lists of just short items. Different results were reported by Cowan, Baddeley, Elliot, and Norris (2003), who found that mixed lists were recalled worse than pure short lists, but better than pure long lists. The experiments reported here suggest that the different empirical findings are due to properties of the stimulus sets used: one stimulus set produces results that replicate Cowan et al., whereas all other sets tested so far yield results that replicate Hulme et al.

Abolishing the word-length effect.

The authors report 2 experiments that compare the recall of long and short words in pure and mixed lists. In pure lists, long words were much more poorly remembered than short words. In mixed lists, this word-length effect was abolished and both the long and short words were recalled as well as short words in pure lists. These findings contradict current models that seek to explain the word-length effect in terms of item-based effects such as difficulty in assembling items, or in terms of list-based accounts of rehearsal speed. An alternative explanation, drawing on ideas of item complexity and item distinctiveness, is proposed.

The time-based word length effect and stimulus set specificity.

The word length effect is the finding that short items are remembered better than long items on immediate serial recall tests. The time-based word length effect refers to this finding when the lists comprise items that vary only in pronunciation time. Three experiments compared recall of three different sets of disyllabic words that differed systematically only in spoken duration. One set showed a word length effect, one set showed no effect of word length, and the third showed a reverse word length effect, with long words recalled better than short. A new fourth set of words was created, and it also failed to yield a time-based word length effect. Because all four experiments used the same methodologyand varied only the stimulus sets, it is argued that the time-based word length effect is not robust and as such poses problems for models based on the phonological loop.