The Word-length Effect and Disyllabic Words

Abstract

Three experiments compared immediate serial recall of disyllabic words that differed on spoken duration. Two sets of long- and short-duration words were selected, in each case maximizing duration differences but matching for frequency, familiarity, phonological similarity, and number of phonemes, and controlling for semantic associations. Serial recall measures were obtained using auditory and visual presentation and spoken and picture-pointing recall. In Experiments 1a and 1b, using the first set of items, long words were better recalled than short words. In Experiments 2a and 2b, using the second set of items, no difference was found between long and short disyllabic words. Experiment 3 confirmed the large advantage for short-duration words in the word set originally selected by Baddeley, Thomson, and Buchanan (1975). These findings suggest that there is no reliable advantage for short-duration disyllables in span tasks, and that previous accounts of a word-length effect in disyllables are based on accidental differences between list items. The failure to find an effect of word duration casts doubt on theories that propose that the capacity of memory span is determined by the duration of list items or the decay rate of phonological information in short-term memory.

Theoretical Implications of Articulatory Duration, Phonological Similarity, and Phonological Complexity in Verbal Working Memory.

“…In the latter experiments, articulatory durations were measured in three ways, which included recording the durations of (a) confederates who read isolated words, (b) experimental participants who read lists of printed words, and (c) participants who spoke repetitive triplets of words. In each of these cases, nominally short words had shorter durations than did long words, as Lovatt et al (2000) had found before. Also, serial recall accuracy was similar to the previous findings by Lovatt et al (2000): No reliable differences occurred between recall accuracy for pure sequences of short words and pure sequences of long words.…”

“…In each of these cases, nominally short words had shorter durations than did long words, as Lovatt et al (2000) had found before. Also, serial recall accuracy was similar to the previous findings by Lovatt et al (2000): No reliable differences occurred between recall accuracy for pure sequences of short words and pure sequences of long words. Once again, given that the phonological-loop model predicts recall accuracy should be lower for sequences of long words, these results seem to disconfirm this model.…”

“…Insofar as we can tell, this debate has not been satisfactorily resolved to date. Lovatt et al (2000). Meanwhile, research by Lovatt et al (2000) has created yet more uncertainty about the status of the phonological-loop model.…”

“…Lovatt et al (2000). Meanwhile, research by Lovatt et al (2000) has created yet more uncertainty about the status of the phonological-loop model. They conducted three experiments with two sets of two-syllable words per experiment (including a total of six different word sets).…”

“…They confirmed that some previous observations of articulatory durations and serial recall accuracy were reliable. Experiments 1 and 3 by Lovatt et al (2002) used subsets of the words from Experiment 2 by Lovatt et al (2000). In the latter experiments, articulatory durations were measured in three ways, which included recording the durations of (a) confederates who read isolated words, (b) experimental participants who read lists of printed words, and (c) participants who spoke repetitive triplets of words.…”