Positional cues in serial learning: The spin-list technique

Abstract

To test the hypothesis that serial recall depends largely on the encoding and retrieval of position-toitem associations, we examined whether people can learn "spin" lists on which starting position is randomly varied across successive learning trials. By turning positional information from a reliable cue into a source of inter-trial interference, we expected learning to be greatly impaired. Contrary to this hypothesis, we found that participants were only slightly worse at serial learning under spin conditions and that this impairment reflects a substantial increase in initiation errors coupled with a small increase in inter-trial forgetting. These data show that participants can effectively use nonpositional cues when positional cues are unreliable.Keywords serial learning; serial-order memory; serial recall Ebbinghaus inaugurated the laboratory study of human memory through his experiments on serial learning-the ability to reproduce a sequence of unrelated items in their order of presentation through successive study and test trials. The theoretical question that has puzzled memory scholars for more than a century since his pioneering work concerns the nature of the stored information that supports this capacity. Historically, the classic theory of serial learning was associative chaining. Chaining theory states that each item in a list is linked most strongly to its immediate neighbors (Ebbinghaus, 1885(Ebbinghaus, /1913Robinson, 1932). As noted by Ebbinghaus (1885Ebbinghaus ( /1913, "…the associative threads, which hold together a remembered series, are spun not merely between each member and its immediate successor, but beyond intervening members to every member which stands to it in any close temporal relation" (p. 94). Retrieval of the first list item facilitates retrieval of the second, and the second facilitates retrieval of the third, and so forth. By somehow accessing the first (or last) item, one can chain forward (or backward) through the sequence. Ladd and Woodworth (1911) noted that people are not limited to just using sequential relations among items to reproduce a sequence. On the basis of the strategies reported by their participants, they suggested that at least some people are able to represent positional information about the studied items, and to use that positional information to facilitate recall. As summarized by Woodworth (1938), "…Grouping, whether rhythmical or spatial, provides a blank form into which the items are inserted. …Remembering the list consists largely in Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Michael J. Kahana, 3401 Walnut St., Suite 303C, Philadelphia, PA 19103, USA; kahana@psych.upenn.edu; fax: 215-746-6848. NIH Public Access NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript finding the items in their places" (p. 32). According to positional-coding hypothesis, as it came to be known, people associate each list item with a representation of the item's position in the input sequence. The first item is linked ...

Positional and temporal clustering in serial order memory

“…To reevaluate the positional and temporal clustering effects in serial recall, we focused on three studies (Golomb, Peelle, Addis, Kahana, & Wingfield, 2008; Kahana & Caplan, 2002, Experiment 2; Kahana et al, 2010). All three studies had participants study and vocally recall lists of common words.…”

“…Clustering analyses performed on the two studies that use longer lists (Kahana & Caplan, 2002; Kahana et al, 2010) focused on the middle list items (4–16 for 19-word lists, and 4–10 for 13-word lists). Edge items were excluded because they cannot appear at all of the distances that were analyzed.…”

“…Although some experiments have demonstrated a role for associative processes in serial learning (e.g., Kahana, Mollison, & Addis, 2010; Serra & Nairne, 2000), the striking effects of positional clustering seen in all serial recall tasks suggest that any contributions of associative chaining are secondary to the more prominent role of positional information.…”

Temporal binding within and across events

“…Recent behavioral analyses have lent support to associative chaining theories by showing that shuffling the position of items while keeping relative order intact does not interfere with serial recall (Kahana et al, 2010) and that temporal clustering is more prominent than positional clustering when deconfounding the two (Solway et al, 2012). Thus, serial recall is thought to involve the mnemonic binding of one item to the next across a temporal gap.…”

Sequential dependencies in recall of sequences: Filling in the blanks

“…Initial theories of serial learning assumed that such chaining occurs (e.g., Ebbinghaus, 1885), and chaining-based computational models have been successfully applied to a wealth of serial learning data (Lewandowsky & Murdock, 1989). In addition, evidence from transfer to paired-associate learning (e.g., Crowder, 1968) and the spin list technique (e.g., Ebenholtz, 1963;Kahana, Mollison, & Addis, 2010) provide some evidence against positional representations (although see Hitch, Fastame, & Flude, 2005) and seem to point to the role of pairwise associations between items in supporting sequence memory. However, this presents a straightforward explanation for only two of the experiments examined by Solway and colleagues, since the other two experiments (Golomb et al, 2008;Kahana & Caplan, 2002)-along with Grenfell-Essam and Ward (2012)-involved serial recall of novel sequences.…”