Valence does not affect serial recall.

Bireta, Tamra J.; Guitard, Dominic; Neath, Ian; Surprenant, Aimée M.

doi:10.1037/cep0000239

Cited by 14 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 34 publications

(92 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As Table 1 indicates, a number of previous studies have found no difference in recognition memory for positive and negative words, but the current results are based on words that are equated for more dimensions. The results are also consistent with those of Bireta et al (2021) finding no difference between serial recall of positive and negative words.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Valence does not affect recognition.

MacMillan¹,

Field²,

Neath³

et al. 2022

Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology / Revue canadienne

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Valence refers to the extent to which a stimulus is viewed as negative or positive. One recent model of valence, the NEVER model (Bowen et al., 2018), predicts that in general negative words will be better remembered than positive or neutral words. However, this prediction is difficult to validate for recognition tests because the literature reports inconsistent findings. Three experiments reexamined whether valence affects recognition of words by taking advantage of the recent increase in the number of high-quality norms and databases, which allow for the construct ion of three sets of stimuli that differ in valence, but are equated on numerous other dimensions known to affect memory. Experiment 1 found no difference in recognition performance between positive and negative words; Experiment 2 found no difference between positive and neutral words; and Experiment 3 found no difference between neutral and negative words. The results disconfirm a prediction of the NEVER model and suggest that previous demonstrations of an effect of valence are due to confounding other dimensions with valence.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Although Bireta et al (2021) reported results that disconfirm the predictions of the NEVER model, they tested only serial recall.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

Valence does not affect recognition.

MacMillan¹,

Field²,

Neath³

et al. 2022

Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology / Revue canadienne

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our results clearly establish that while valence does not impact short-term ordered recall (Bireta et al, 2021), arousal does have a reliable effect. In their discussion, Bireta et al acknowledged that they cannot dismiss the possibility that their null effect was due to their implementation of many controls in stimulus selection.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

“…Arousal could also increase the level of activation of lexical-semantic representations due to the involvement of the motivation systems involved in emotion processing. Under this view, because they contrasted positively and negatively valence words, Bireta et al (2021) could not have uncovered an effect of valence; items in both conditions would influence activation equally. However, with a neutral condition, it should be possible to observe an effect of valence.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Arousal affects short-term serial recall.

Landry¹,

Guitard²,

Saint‐Aubin³

2022

Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology / Revue canadienne

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Arousal affects our lives in a variety of ways; it can direct our attention to what is important in our environment and help us remember it more clearly. However, it remains unclear how arousal impacts shortterm memory. Here we addressed this gap in our knowledge by contrasting four hypotheses: the Arousal Hypothesis, the Priority-Binding Hypothesis, the Rehearsal Hypothesis, and the Rapid-Processing Hypothesis. To distinguish between these competing accounts, we conducted two immediate serial recall experiments in which we manipulated arousal (low-arousal words vs. high-arousal words), list composition (pure vs. mixed), and presentation rate (200 ms vs. 1,000 ms). Overall, participants were better at recalling arousing information, regardless of list type or presentation rate. Our results provide clear evidence in favor of the arousal hypothesis which suggests that arousing information benefits from biologically induced enhancements at encoding. Public Significance StatementWhen studying verbal memory, emotional arousal refers to the level of excitement elicited by a word. However, the effect of arousal on short-term memory is uncertain. The current assessment reveals that arousal enhances performance in a short-term ordered recall task at fast and slower presentation rates, and in both pure and mixed lists.

show abstract

“…The early and late AoA words did differ in valence, t(26) = 2.45, p = .02, with the early words being more positive (M = 6.04, SD = 1.24) than the later words (M = 4.94, SD = 1.14), using theWarriner, Kuperman, and Brysbaert (2013) norms. However,Bireta, Guitard, Neath, and Surprenant (2021) have argued that valence does not affect immediate serial recall.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Re-assessing age of acquisition effects in recognition, free recall, and serial recall

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Age of acquisition (AoA) refers to the age at which a person learns a word. Research has converged on the conclusion that early AoA words are processed more efficiently than late AoA words on a number of perceptual and reading tasks. However, only a few studies have investigated whether AoA affects memory on recognition, serial recall, and free recall tests, and the results are equivocal. We took advantage of the recent increase in the number of high-quality norms and databases to construct a pool of early and late AoA words that were equated on numerous other dimensions. There was a late AoA advantage in recognition using both pure (Experiment 1) and mixed (Experiment 2) lists, no effect of AoA on serial recall of either pure (Experiment 3) or mixed (Experiment 4) lists, and no effect of AoA on free recall of either pure (Experiment 5) or mixed lists (Experiment 6). We conclude that AoA does reliably affect memory on some memory tasks (recognition), but not others (serial recall, free recall), and that no current account of AoA can explain the findings.

show abstract

Valence does not affect serial recall.

Cited by 14 publications

References 34 publications

Valence does not affect recognition.

Valence does not affect recognition.

Arousal affects short-term serial recall.

Re-assessing age of acquisition effects in recognition, free recall, and serial recall

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About