Literature DB >> 9342961

Reverse "repetition blindness" and release from "repetition blindness": constructive variations on the "repetition blindness" effect.

B W Whittlesea1, K H Wai.   

Abstract

N. Kanwisher observed that subjects shown rapid lists of words recall two occurrences of a repeated word less often than two unrelated words. Kanwisher explained this "repetition blindness" through a type/token account, which assumes that encoding the second occurrence of a repeated word is inhibited if it occurs too soon after the first. More fundamentally, it assumes that failure to recall a word from a rapid list results from failure to encode its occurrence. Contrary to that interpretation, we observed that subjects can often recognize words that they cannot recall from a rapid list. We also observed "reverse repetition blindness," when the second presentation was given greater contextual support, and a "release from repetition blindness" effect, when distinctive contextual support was given to ech occurrence. We concluded that a constructive account of remembering provides a better explanation of all of the effects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9342961     DOI: 10.1007/bf00419765

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Res        ISSN: 0340-0727


  9 in total

1.  When lust is lost: orthographic similarity effects in the encoding and reconstruction of rapidly presented word lists.

Authors:  M E Masson; J I Caldwell; B W Whittlesea
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 3.051

2.  Some characteristics of word encoding.

Authors:  D D Wickens
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1973-12

3.  Repetition blindness: levels of processing.

Authors:  N G Kanwisher; M C Potter
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1990-02       Impact factor: 3.332

4.  Repetition blindness: type recognition without token individuation.

Authors:  N G Kanwisher
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1987-11

5.  Repetition deficit in rapid-serial-visual-presentation displays: encoding failure or retrieval failure?

Authors:  I T Armstrong; D J Mewhort
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 3.332

6.  Visual and phonological codes in repetition blindness.

Authors:  D Bavelier; M C Potter
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1992-02       Impact factor: 3.332

7.  Determinants of repetition blindness.

Authors:  J Park; N Kanwisher
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 3.332

8.  Repetition blindness: the effects of stimulus modality and spatial displacement.

Authors:  N Kanwisher; M C Potter
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1989-03

9.  Types and tokens unscathed: a reply to Whittlesea, Dorken, and Podrouzek (1995) and Whittlesea and Podrouzek (1995).

Authors:  P Downing; N Kanwisher
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 3.051

  9 in total
  2 in total

1.  Illusory words created by repetition blindness: a technique for probing sublexical representations.

Authors:  C L Harris; A L Morris
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2001-03

2.  Repetition blindness in sentence contexts: not just an attribution?

Authors:  Rachel Bond; Sally Andrews
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2008-03
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.