Modeling distributions of immediate memory effects: No strategies needed?
Beaman, C. P., Neath, I. and Surprenant, A. M. (2008) Modeling distributions of immediate memory effects: No strategies needed? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 34 (1). pp. 219-229. ISSN 0278-7393
Full text not archived in this repository.
To link to this item DOI: 10.1037/0278-73188.8.131.52
Many models of immediate memory predict the presence or absence of various effects, but none have been tested to see whether they predict an appropriate distribution of effect sizes. The authors show that the feature model (J. S. Nairne, 1990) produces appropriate distributions of effect sizes for both the phonological confusion effect and the word-length effect. The model produces the appropriate number of reversals, when participants are more accurate with similar items or long items, and also correctly predicts that participants performing less well overall demonstrate smaller and less reliable phonological similarity and word-length effects and are more likely to show reversals. These patterns appear within the model without the need to assume a change in encoding or rehearsal strategy or the deployment of a different storage buffer. The implications of these results and the wider applicability of the distributionmodeling approach are discussed.
• Baddeley, A. D. (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 417–423. • Baddeley, A. D., & Larsen, J. (2007). The phonological loop unmasked? A comment on the evidence for a “perceptual-gestural” alternative. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 497–504. • Baddeley, A. D., Thomson, N., & Buchanan, M. (1975). Word length and the structure of short-term memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 575–589. • Beaman, C. P. (2006). The relationship between absolute and proportion scores of serial order memory: Simulation predictions and empirical data. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 92–98. • Brown, G. D. A., & Hulme, C. (1995). Modeling item length effects in memory span: No rehearsal needed? Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 594–621. • Caplan, D., Rochon, E., & Waters, G. S. (1992). Articulatory and phonological determinants of word-length effects in span tasks. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 45(A), 177–192. • Conrad, R. (1964). Acoustic confusions in immediate memory. British Journal of Psychology, 55, 75–84. • Cooper, R. P., Schwartz, M. F., Yule, P., & Shallice, T. (2005). The simulation of action disorganisation in complex activities of daily living. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22, 959–1004. • Della Sala, S., & Logie, R. H. (1997). Impairments of methodology and theory in cognitive neuropsychology: A case for rehabilitation? Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 7, 367–385. • Estes, W. K. (1972). An associative basis for coding and organization in memory. In A. W. Melton & E. Martin (Eds.), Coding processes in human memory (pp. 161–190). Washington, DC: Winston. • Hintzman, D. L. (1986). “Schema abstraction” in a multiple-trace memory model. Psychological Review, 93, 411–428. • Hintzman, D. L. (1988). Judgments of frequency and recognition memory in a multiple-trace memory model. Psychological Review, 95, 528–551. • Hitch, G. J., & Halliday, M. S. (1983). Working memory in children. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series B, 302, 325– 340. • Hulme, C., Neath, I., Stuart, G., Shostak, L., Surprenant, A. M., & Brown, G. D. A. (2006). The distinctiveness of the word-length effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 586–594. • Hulme, C., Surprenant, A. M., Bireta, T. J., Stuart, G., & Neath, I. (2004). Abolishing the word-length effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 98–106. • Johns, G. (1981). Difference score measures of organizational behavior variables: A critique. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 27, 443–463. • Jones, D. M., Hughes, R. W., & Macken, W. J. (2007). The phonological store abandoned. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 505–511. • LaPointe, L. B., & Engle, R. W. (1990). Simple and complex word spans as measures of working memory capacity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 1118–1133. • Lewandowsky, S. (1993). The rewards and hazards of computer simulation. Psychological Science, 4, 236–243. • Lewandowsky, S., & Heit, E. (2006). Some targets for memory models. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 441–446. • Logie, R. H., Della Sala, S., Laiacona, M., Chalmers, P., & Wynn, V. (1996). Group aggregates and individual reliability: The case of verbal short-term memory. Memory & Cognition, 24, 305–321. • Lovatt, P., & Avons, S. (2001). Re-evaluating the word-length effect. In J. Andrade (Ed.), Working memory in perspective (pp. 199–218). Hove, England: Psychology Press. • Melton, A. W. (1967). Individual differences and theoretical process variables: General comments on the conference. In R. M. Gagne´ (Ed.), Learning and individual differences (pp. 238–252). Columbus, OH: Merrill. • Nairne, J. S. (1990). A feature model of immediate memory. Memory & Cognition, 18, 251–269. • Nairne, J. S. (2002). Remembering over the short-term: The case against the standard model. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 53–81. • Neath, I. (1999). Modelling the effects of irrelevant speech on order. International Journal of Psychology, 34, 410–418. • Neath, I. (2000). Modeling the effects of irrelevant speech on memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 403–423. • Neath, I., Bireta, T. J., & Surprenant, A. M. (2003). The time-based word length effect and stimulus set specificity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 430–434. • Neath, I., Farley, L. A., & Surprenant, A. M. (2003). Directly assessing the relationship between irrelevant speech and articulatory suppression. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 56(A), 1269–1278. • Neath, I., & Nairne, J. S. (1995). Word-length effects in immediate memory: Overwriting trace decay theory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 429–441. • Neath, I., & Surprenant, A. M. (2003). Human memory: An introduction to research, data, and theory (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. • Neath, I., & Surprenant, A. M. (2007). Accounting for age-related differences in working memory using the feature model. In N. Osaka, R. H. • Logie, & M. D’Esposito (Eds.), The cognitive neuroscience of working memory: Behavioural and neural correlates (pp. 165–179). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. • Nesselroade, J. R., & Salthouse, T. A. (2004). Methodological and theoretical implications of intraindividual variability in perceptual-motor performance. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 59(B), 49–55. • Page, M. P. A., & Norris, D. (1998). The primacy model: A new model of immediate serial recall. Psychological Review, 105, 761–781. • Peter, J. P., Churchill, G. A., & Brown, T. J. (1993). Caution in the use of difference scores in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 655–662. • Silveri, M. C., Di Betta, M. M., Filippini, V., Leggio, M. G., & Molinari, M. (1998). Verbal short-term store-rehearsal system and the cerebellum: Evidence from a patient with a right cerebellar lesion. Brain, 121, 2175–2187. • Surprenant, A. M., Neath, I., & LeCompte, D. C. (1999). Irrelevant speech, phonological similarity and presentation modality. Memory, 7, 405– 420. • Vallar, G., & Shallice, T. (1990). Neuropsychological impairments of short-term memory. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.