Literature DB >> 8961817

Cuing effects in short-term recall.

G Tehan1, M S Humphreys.   

Abstract

Past research indicates that short-term memory can be immune to the effects of proactive interference (PI). Past research also indicates that immunity to PI is found only in those circumstances where phonemic representations of to-be-remembered items are present and provide discriminative information. The first three experiments demonstrate the existence of a further boundary condition. PI is observed only if interfering and target items are subsumed by the same cue. This finding suggests that short-term recall, like long-term recall, is cue dependent. Cuing effects are further explored in two experiments that manipulate category dominance. The finding that category dominance effects parallel PI effects strongly suggests that retrieval cues play a critical role in short-term recall.

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8961817     DOI: 10.3758/bf03201097

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


  7 in total

1.  Short-term retention of individual verbal items.

Authors:  L R PETERSON; M J PETERSON
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1959-09

Review 2.  Processing implicit and explicit representations.

Authors:  D L Nelson; T A Schreiber; C L McEvoy
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 8.934

Review 3.  A feature model of immediate memory.

Authors:  J S Nairne
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1990-05

Review 4.  A framework for interpreting recency effects in immediate serial recall.

Authors:  J S Nairne
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1988-07

5.  Set-size effects in primary memory: an age-related capacity limitation?

Authors:  G S Halford; M T Maybery; J D Bain
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1988-09

6.  Transient phonemic codes and immunity to proactive interference.

Authors:  G Tehan; M S Humphreys
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1995-03

7.  Encoding and cuing sounds and senses.

Authors:  D L Nelson; M A Friedrich
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Learn       Date:  1980-11
  7 in total
  12 in total

1.  Target similarity effects: support for the parallel distributed processing assumptions.

Authors:  M S Humphreys; G Tehan; A O'Shea; S W Bolland
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2000-07

2.  Proactive interference and cuing effects in short-term cued recall: does foil context matter?

Authors:  Winston D Goh; Huiqin Tan
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2006-07

3.  The roles of semantic similarity and proactive interference in the word length effect.

Authors:  Winston D Goh; Chang Khiang Goh
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2006-12

4.  Retrieval interference in sentence comprehension.

Authors:  Julie A Van Dyke; Brian McElree
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 3.059

5.  Creating proactive interference in immediate recall: building a dog from a dart, a mop, and a fig.

Authors:  G Tehan; M S Humphreys
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1998-05

6.  Testing the myth of the encoding-retrieval match.

Authors:  Winston D Goh; Sharon H X Lu
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2012-01

7.  Cue-dependent interference in comprehension.

Authors:  Julie A Van Dyke
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2011-10-01       Impact factor: 3.059

8.  Memory as discrimination: what distraction reveals.

Authors:  C Philip Beaman; Maciej Hanczakowski; Helen M Hodgetts; John E Marsh; Dylan M Jones
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2013-11

9.  Distributed Patterns of Brain Activity that Lead to Forgetting.

Authors:  Ilke Oztekin; David Badre
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2011-08-22       Impact factor: 3.169

10.  Reinstating higher order properties of a study list by retrieving a list item.

Authors:  Michael S Humphreys; Krista L Murray; Joyce Yanfang Koh
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2014-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.