A model linking immediate serial recall, the Hebb repetition effect and the learning of phonological word forms

Page, Mike; Norris, Dennis

doi:10.1098/rstb.2009.0173

Cited by 149 publications

(255 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

242

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…More specifically, the Hebb effect reflects a form of longterm learning that results in unified representations of lists, or sub-sequences in lists, akin to the learning of words by forming unified representations of sequences of phonemes or letters (Page & Norris, 2009). Converging evidence supports the close link between the Hebb effect and word learning: The size of the Hebb effect correlates with individual differences in the ability to learn new word forms (Mosse & Jarrold, 2008;Szmalec, Loncke, Page, & Duyck, 2011).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There was no evidence of learning in this condition. On the basis of their results, Cumming et al (2003) as well as Hitch et al (2005) argued that Hebb learning consists of the formation of a unified (chunked) representation of the list, or at least of segments of the list (for computational models implementing this idea see Burgess & Hitch, 2006;Page & Norris, 2009). The acquisition and use of such chunks is disrupted if repetition is limited to sub-components of learned chunks.…”

Section: Asked Participants Inmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, the pervasive Hebb effect documents the contribution of some longer-lasting form of memory, referred to as long-term memory or secondary memory, to tests of immediate serial recall. The Hebb effect implies that lists maintained for immediate recall leave long-term memory traces, and that these traces are used in immediate recall (Burgess & Hitch, 2005Page & Norris, 2009). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Hebb repetition effect in simple and complex memory span

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Hebb repetition effect refers to the finding that immediate serial recall is improved over trials for memory lists that are surreptitiously repeated across trials, relative to new lists. We show in four experiments that the Hebb repetition effect is also observed with a complex-span task, in which encoding or retrieval of list items alternates with an unrelated processing task. The interruption of encoding or retrieval by the processing task did not reduce the size of the Hebb effect, demonstrating that incidental long-term learning forms integrated representations of lists, excluding the interleaved processing events. Contrary to the assumption that complex-span performance relies more on long-term memory than standard immediate serial recall (simple span), the Hebb effect was not larger in complex-span than in simple-span performance. The Hebb effect in complex span was also not modulated by the opportunity for refreshing list items, questioning a role of refreshing for the acquisition of the long-term memory representations underlying the effect.Keywords Immediate serial recall . Complex span task . Working memory . Long-term memory Half a century ago, Donald Hebb (1961) asked participants in Tests of immediate serial recall are routinely used to investigate short-term or working memory, also known as primary memory (from here on we will use the term working memory). Most tests of serial recall involve the simple-span procedure, in which people must recall a list of items immediately upon presentation in forward order. Because of its limited capacity, working memory is commonly assumed to hold only the current list, perhaps with a few traces of the immediately preceding one, but it is not thought to be suited to acquire a representation of the commonalities of lists spanning four trials. Therefore, the pervasive Hebb effect documents the contribution of some longer-lasting form of memory, referred to as long-term memory or secondary memory, to tests of immediate serial recall. The Hebb effect implies that lists maintained for immediate recall leave long-term memory traces, and that these traces are used in immediate recall (Burgess & Hitch, 2005Page & Norris, 2009).Here we investigate whether the Hebb repetition effect is also observed with two variants of the complex-span paradigm. The typical complex-span task differs from the simple-span task by the addition of a distractor task that is to be carried out in between pairs of list items during encoding; here we also investigate a less common variant in which distractors are interspersed between items at retrieval. The distractor task usually requires processing without any explicit memory demand, for instance reading sentences (reading span, Daneman & Carpenter, 1980), solving arithmetic an experiment to remember lists of random digits for immediate recall in the order of presentation. Unbeknown to the participants, Hebb presented the same list on every third trial, interspersed with new random lists in the intervening two trials. Across 24 tria...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Asked Participants Inmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Hebb repetition effect in simple and complex memory span

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The paired-associate learning paradigm differs from the Hebb effect because it involves explicit learning, a conscious intention to learn (Ellis, 1994;Hulstijn, 2001). Nevertheless, it has been suggested that the sequencelearning mechanism tapped experimentally in the Hebb repetition paradigm supports word learning generally (Page & Norris, 2009;Szmalec, Duyck, Vandierendonck, Mata, & Page, 2009). Mosse and Jarrold (2008) employed an adapted version of the paired-associate task involving word-picture and nonword-picture pairs in their group of typically developing 5-to 7-year-olds.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Domain-specific and domain-general constraints on word and sequence learning

Archibald

Joanisse

2012

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relative influences of language-related and memory-related constraints on the learning of novel words and sequences were examined by comparing individual differences in performance of children with and without specific deficits in either language or working memory. Children recalled lists of words in a Hebbian learning protocol in which occasional lists repeated, yielding improved recall over the course of the task on the repeated lists. The task involved presentation of pictures of common nouns followed immediately by equivalent presentations of the spoken names. The same participants also completed a paired-associate learning task involving word-picture and nonword-picture pairs. Hebbian learning was observed for all groups. Domaingeneral working memory constrained immediate recall, whereas language abilities impacted recall in the auditory modality only. In addition, working memory constrained paired-associate learning generally, whereas language abilities disproportionately impacted novel word learning. Overall, all of the learning tasks were highly correlated with domain-general working memory. The learning of nonwords was additionally related to general intelligence, phonological short-term memory, language abilities, and implicit learning. The results suggest that distinct associations between languageand memory-related mechanisms support learning of familiar and unfamiliar phonological forms and sequences.

show abstract

“…In other words, existing long-term knowledge is a potential constraint on working memory performance. Conversely, working memory may serve as a mental workspace, allowing for the temporary maintenance of information that can be bound together into learnt, longer-term representations (see Baddeley, Gathercole, & Papagno, 1998;Page & Norris, 2009). …”

Section: Working Out Howmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Mid-Career Award Working out how working memory works: evidence from typical and atypical development

Jarrold

2017

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Telephone: +44 (0)117 9288450Working out how 2 Abstract Working memory is an extremely influential concept within experimental psychology, with, at the time of writing, over 90 papers with this term in their title published in this journal alone since 2000. One reason for this interest is that measures of working memory tend to be strong correlates of important indices of real world function. In addition, at first sight working memory appears to be a relatively simple concept to understand. However, despite this apparent simplicity, explaining working memory performance is not straightforward. In this paper I address this challenge, with a particular focus on the development of working memory performance in children; both children developing typically and those experiencing atypical development. I specifically highlight the multiple constraints on working memory performance, and how these constraints inter-relate. I then consider the broader theoretical implications of each of these constraints for current accounts of working memory and its development.

show abstract

A model linking immediate serial recall, the Hebb repetition effect and the learning of phonological word forms

Cited by 149 publications

References 62 publications

The Hebb repetition effect in simple and complex memory span

The Hebb repetition effect in simple and complex memory span

Domain-specific and domain-general constraints on word and sequence learning

The Mid-Career Award Working out how working memory works: evidence from typical and atypical development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About