Five experiments investigated the effects of cue familiarity, cue distinctiveness, and retention interval on prospective remembering. Results showed that (1) performance in a prospective memory task is facilitated when the cue is unfamiliar and/or distinctive; and (2) it is impaired by 3-minutes' delay between the instructions and the task (Experiment 1). A beneficial effect of distinctiveness was also found when perceptual rather than semantic distinctiveness was tested (Experiment 2). Experiments 3 and 4 ruled out the hypotheses that "unfulfilled expectancy" of an event (i.e. non-appearance of the cue during training) (Experiment 3), or some sort of "habituation" in the target context (Experiment 4), may have caused the low performance observed in the delayed conditions. Finally, results from Experiment 5 showed that delay negatively affected prospective remembering when it was filled with either a demanding interpolated activity (practice in a STM task) or an undemanding motoric activity (repetitive hands movements). Unfilled delay and an undemanding verbal activity (counting) were found not to affect prospective memory. Implications for the mechanisms underlying prospective remembering are discussed.

No abstract

Two experiments were carried out to test the hypothesis that verbal recoding of visual stimuli in short-term memory influences long-term memory encoding and impairs subsequent mental image operations. Easy and difficult-to-name stimuli were used. When rotated 90°counterclock-wise, each stimulus revealed a new pattern consisting of two capital letters joined together. In both experiments, subjects first learned a short series of stimuli and were then asked to rotate mental images of the stimuli in order to detect the hidden letters. In Experiment 1, articulatory suppression was used to prevent subjects from subvocal rehearsal when learning the stimuli, whereas in Experiment 2, verbal labels were presented with each stimulus during learning to encourage a reliance on the verbal code. As predicted, performance in the imagery task was significantly improved by suppression when the stimuli were easy to name (Experiment 1) but was severely disrupted by labeling when the stimuli were difficult to name

No abstract

No abstract