Does dynamic visual noise eliminate the concreteness effect in working memory?

Chubala, Chrissy M.; Surprenant, Aimée M.; Neath, Ian; Quinlan, Philip T.

doi:10.1016/j.jml.2018.05.009

Cited by 25 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The reason is that Bthe probability of dual coding (and recall) decreases from pictures to concrete words to abstract words because subjects in memory experiments are highly likely to name pictures of familiar objects covertly during learning, somewhat less likely to image to concrete nouns, and least likely to image to abstract nouns^ (Paivio, 1991, p. 265). Paivio and Csapo (1969) observed this ordering in free recall, and the concreteness effect has been observed in many different tests, including recognition (Gorman, 1961), paired associates (Paivio, 1967), serial recall (Walker & Hulme, 1999), serial recognition (Chubala, Surprenant, Neath, & Quinlan, 2018), and free reconstruction of order (Neath, 1997).…”

Section: Accounts Of the Picture Superiority Effectmentioning

confidence: 76%

Increasing word distinctiveness eliminates the picture superiority effect in recognition: Evidence for the physical-distinctiveness account

2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A well-established phenomenon in the memory literature is the picture superiority effect-the finding that, all else being equal, memory is better for pictures than for words (Paivio & Csapo, 1973). Theorists have attributed pictures' mnemonic advantage to dual coding (Paivio, 1971), conceptual distinctiveness (Hamilton & Geraci, 2006), and physical distinctiveness (Mintzer & Snodgrass, 1999). Here, we present a novel test of the physical-distinctiveness account of picture superiority: If the greater physical variability of pictures relative to words is responsible for their mnemonic benefit, then increasing the distinctiveness of words and/or reducing the physical variability of pictures should reduce or eliminate the picture superiority effect. In the present experiments we increased word distinctiveness by varying font style, font size, color, and capitalization. Additionally, in Experiment 3 we reduced the distinctiveness of pictures by presenting black-and-white pictures with similar orientations. In Experiment 4, a forced choice procedure was used in which subjects were asked to identify the form that each probe had taken during the study phase. The results were consistent with the distinctiveness prediction and, notably, were inconsistent with dual coding.

show abstract

Section: Accounts Of the Picture Superiority Effectmentioning

confidence: 76%

Increasing word distinctiveness eliminates the picture superiority effect in recognition: Evidence for the physical-distinctiveness account

2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In one of the few studies to directly compare these two tasks using a detection-type analysis, Chubala, Surprenant, Neath, and Quinlan (2018) found that dynamic visual noise, which involves an array of squares that change randomly between black and white several times a second, had a detrimental effect on memory for concrete words when assessed by d′ in serial recognition, but had no effect on memory for concrete words when assessed by proportion correct in serial recall. The lack of an effect of dynamic visual noise on immediate serial recall has been replicated a number of times (e.g., Castellà & Campoy, 2018;Ueno & Saito, 2013).…”

Section: Serial Recall Versus Serial Recognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual similarity effects in immediate serial recall and (sometimes) in immediate serial recognition

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Words that sound dissimilar are recalled better than otherwise comparable words that sound similar on both immediate serial recall and immediate serial recognition tests, the so-called acoustic similarity effect. Although studies using immediate serial recall have shown an analogous visual similarity effect, in which words that look dissimilar are recalled better than words that look similar, this effect has not been examined in immediate serial recognition. We derived a prediction from the Feature Model that a visual similarity effect will be observed in immediate serial recognition only when the items are acoustically dissimilar; the model predicts no effect when the items are acoustically similar. Experiments 1 and 2 used visually dissimilar and visually similar stimuli that were all acoustically similar and replicated the visual similarity effect in serial recall but revealed no effect in serial recognition. Experiments 3 and 4 used a second set of stimuli that were acoustically dissimilar and found a visual similarity effect in both serial recall and serial recognition. The experiments confirm the Feature Model's predictions and add to earlier findings that the two tests, serial recall and serial recognition, may show quite different results because the two tests are not as similar as previously thought.

show abstract

“…On half the trials, two items are transposed in the second list and the task is to indicate if the items are in the same or in a different order as the first list. Chubala, Surprenant, Neath, and Quinlan ( 2018 ) found that performance on the serial recognition test was lower when it was the only test, but higher when half the trials could end in a serial recall test. There is other evidence for a metacognitive component for tasks involving frequency (e.g., Higham, Bruno, & Perfect, 2010 ; Tullis & Benjamin, 2012 ).…”

Section: Discussion Of Experiments 5 Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

The item/order account of word frequency effects: Evidence from serial order tests

Neath

Quinlan

2021

Mem Cogn

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to the item/order hypothesis, high-frequency words are processed more efficiently and therefore order information can be readily encoded. In contrast, low-frequency words are processed less efficiently and the focus on item-specific processing compromises order information. Most experiments testing this account use free recall, which has led to two problems: First, the role of order information is difficult to evaluate in free recall, and second, the data from free recall show all three possible patterns of results: memory for high-frequency words can be better than, the same as, or worse than that for low-frequency words. A series of experiments tested the item/order hypothesis using tests where the role of order information is less ambiguous. The item/order hypothesis predicts better performance for high- than low-frequency words when pure lists are used in both immediate serial recall (ISR) and serial reconstruction of order (SRO) tests. In contrast, when mixed (alternating) lists are used, it predicts better performance for low- than for high-frequency words with ISR tests, but equivalent performance with SRO tests. The experiments generally confirm these predictions, with the notable exception of a block order effect in SRO tasks: When a block of low-frequency lists preceded a block of high-frequency lists, a high-frequency advantage was observed but when a block of high-frequency lists preceded a block of low-frequency lists, no frequency effect was observed. A final experiment provides evidence that this block order effect is due to metacognitive factors.

show abstract

Does dynamic visual noise eliminate the concreteness effect in working memory?

Cited by 25 publications

References 49 publications

Increasing word distinctiveness eliminates the picture superiority effect in recognition: Evidence for the physical-distinctiveness account

Increasing word distinctiveness eliminates the picture superiority effect in recognition: Evidence for the physical-distinctiveness account

Visual similarity effects in immediate serial recall and (sometimes) in immediate serial recognition

The item/order account of word frequency effects: Evidence from serial order tests

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About