Literature DB >> 24203871

The role of attention in visual and auditory suffix effects.

G J Hitch1.   

Abstract

The auditory suffix effect (SE), in which recall of the terminal items of a sequence is impaired by presenting a redundant item at the end of the sequence, has been attributed to the displacement of information from auditory sensory storage. However, the SE may result entirely from unnecessary processing of the redundant item due to a failure of attentional control. Two studies examined this possibility using visual presentation to minimize the importance of sensory storage as a source of information. Experiment I first demonstrated a visual SE and showed that its magnitude did not vary when background illumination was altered, a factor which affects the duration of sensory storage. Experiment II used auditory as well as visual presentation and tested the hypothesis that training subjects to ignore the suffix would reduce the SE. Training was achieved by interpolating redundant items identical to the suffix within sequences. It abolished the visual SE but left the auditory SE unaffected. The visual SE, therefore, is not solely determined by the physical characteristics of the suffix, and cannot be based on erasure in sensory storage. The auditory data, on the other hand, were consistent with the erasure hypothesis. It was concluded that an SE does not of itself demonstrate the involvement of sensory storage, and, in particular, the visual SE appears to reflect the degree to which the redundant item can be excluded from focal attention.

Entities:  

Year:  1975        PMID: 24203871     DOI: 10.3758/BF03197521

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  3 in total

1.  A model for visual memory tasks.

Authors:  G SPERLING
Journal:  Hum Factors       Date:  1963-02       Impact factor: 2.888

2.  A tactile suffix effect.

Authors:  M J Watkins; O C Watkins
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1974-01

3.  Experiments with the stimulus suffix effect.

Authors:  J Morton; R G Crowder; H A Prussin
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1971-11
  3 in total
  16 in total

Review 1.  Modeling the effects of irrelevant speech on memory.

Authors:  I Neath
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2000-09

2.  The sandwich effect reassessed: effects of streaming, distraction, and modality.

Authors:  Alastair P Nicholls; Dylan M Jones
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2002-01

3.  Abstract versus modality-specific memory representations in processing auditory and visual speech.

Authors:  B de Gelder; J Vroomen
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1992-09

4.  Exploring the suffix effect in serial visuospatial short-term memory.

Authors:  Fabrice B R Parmentier; Sébastien Tremblay; Dylan M Jones
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-04

5.  Is there a modality effect? Evidence for visual recency and suffix effects.

Authors:  M W Battacchi; G M Pelamatti; C Umiltà
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1990-11

Review 6.  Modality effects and the structure of short-term verbal memory.

Authors:  C G Penney
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1989-07

7.  Two-component theory of the suffix effect: contrary evidence.

Authors:  Lance C Bloom
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2006-04

8.  Serial position effects in recognition memory for odors: a reexamination.

Authors:  Christopher Miles; Kathryn Hodder
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2005-10

9.  Listening to every other word: examining the strength of linkage variables in forming streams of speech.

Authors:  Gerald Kidd; Virginia Best; Christine R Mason
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Ineffectiveness of visual distinctiveness in enhancing immediate recall.

Authors:  J McDowd; S Madigan
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1991-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.