Literature DB >> 8718769

The relation between discriminability and memory for vowels, consonants, and silent-center vowels.

A M Surprenant1, I Neath.   

Abstract

People remember lists of vowel-contrasting syllables better than lists that vary only in stop consonant identity. Most views suggest that this difference is due to the structure of immediate memory and the greater discriminability of vowels compared with consonants. In all of these views, there is a presumed systematic relationship between discriminability and recall so that the more discriminable an item, the better that item should be recalled. The 11 experiments reported here measured the relative discriminability of and compared serial recall for (1) intact syllables that varied only in the medial vowel, (2) intact syllables that varied only in the initial consonant, and (3) syllables with the center vowel replaced by silence (so-called silent-center vowels). When item discriminability, as measured by identification, was equated for consonant-contrasting and silent-center lists, serial recall performance was also equal. However, even when the vowels were less discriminable than the consonants or silent-center vowels, serial recall performance for the vowels was still better. These results are problematic for theories based on acoustic discriminability but can be explained parsimoniously by Nairne's (1990) feature model.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8718769     DOI: 10.3758/bf03213299

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


  21 in total

1.  In search of a strong visual recency effect.

Authors:  D C LeCompte
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1992-09

2.  Stimulus order effects in vowel discrimination.

Authors:  B H Repp; R G Crowder
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  A tactile suffix effect.

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

4.  Auditory temporal acuity in relation to category boundaries; speech and nonspeech stimuli.

Authors:  D Kewley-Port; C S Watson; D C Foyle
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1988-03       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Auditory and phonetic memory codes in the discrimination of consonants and vowels.

Authors:  David B Pisoni
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1973-06-01

6.  Representation of speech sounds in precategorical acoustic storage.

Authors:  R G Crowder
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1973-04

7.  Dynamic specification of coarticulated vowels.

Authors:  W Strange; J J Jenkins; T L Johnson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1983-09       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  The modality effect and echoic persistence.

Authors:  O C Watkins; M J Watkins
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1980-09

9.  The stimulus suffix effect as a memory coding phenomenon.

Authors:  K T Spoehr; W J Corin
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1978-11

10.  On the locus of the stimulus suffix effect.

Authors:  J S Nairne; R G Crowder
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1982-07
View more
  11 in total

1.  A grouping interpretation of the modality effect in immediate probed recognition.

Authors:  D J Murray; N Boudreau; K K Burggraf; L Dobell; S L Guger; A Leask; L Stanford; T L Tate; M Wheeler
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1999-03

Review 2.  Modeling the effects of irrelevant speech on memory.

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

3.  Effects of lexical competition on immediate memory span for spoken words.

Authors:  Winston D Goh; David B Pisoni
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol A       Date:  2003-08

4.  Advantages and disadvantages of phonological similarity in serial recall and serial recognition of nonwords.

Authors:  Arild Lian; Paul Johan Karlsen
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2004-03

5.  Disruption by speech of serial short-term memory: the role of changing-state vowels.

Authors:  Robert W Hughes; Sébastien Tremblay; Dylan M Jones
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2005-10

6.  Modeling age-related differences in immediate memory using SIMPLE.

Authors:  Aimée M Surprenant; Ian Neath; Gordon D A Brown
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 3.059

7.  Irrelevant speech eliminates the word length effect.

Authors:  I Neath; A M Surprenant; D C LeCompte
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1998-03

8.  Modality, concreteness, and set-size effects in a free reconstruction of order task.

Authors:  I Neath
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1997-03

9.  Estimating working memory capacity for lists of nonverbal sounds.

Authors:  Dawei Li; Nelson Cowan; J Scott Saults
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 2.199

10.  Failing to get the gist of what's being said: background noise impairs higher-order cognitive processing.

Authors:  John E Marsh; Robert Ljung; Anatole Nöstl; Emma Threadgold; Tom A Campbell
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-05-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.