Serial memory processing: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 22:56, 20 February 2022

Latest revision as of 05:57, 13 May 2024

(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)

Line 19:

;Primacy and recency effects

In serial memory processing, [[Primacy effect]] and [[Recencyrecency effect]] effects for accuracy of recall are commonly found. These effects are found for both visual<ref name=Parmentier>Parmentier, F. B., Andres, P., Elford, G., & Jones, D. M. (2006). Organization of visuo-spatial serial memory: Interaction of temporal order with spatial and temporal grouping. ''Psychological Research, 70''(1).</ref> and auditory<ref name=Avons>Avons, S. E. (1998). Serial report and item recognition of novel visual patterns. ''British Journal of Psychology, 89''(1).</ref> stimuli in memory tasks. This means that of the many items in a memory set during serial memory processing, the first item and the last seem to be recalled faster and more accurately than the other items. These effects may exist if recall errors are due to serial position. It is theorized that items are mistaken for other items from a nearby position in the memory set (e.g. the 5th item is mistaken for the 4th item or the 6th item). Since there are more nearby serial positions to middle items in a set, there are therefore more opportunities for mixing-up items. On the other hand, there are very few serial positions nearby to the first and last position, and therefore these positions may be remembered more accurately (or mistaken less). The first and last position may be less error-prone positions and more easily recalled.<ref name=Naire>Nairne, J. S. (1992). The loss of positional certainty in long-term memory.''Psychological Science, 3''(3).</ref>

[[File:Graph_of_the_Primacy-Recency_Effects.jpeg|thumb|right|This graph, recreated from Nairne (1992), demonstrates the primacy and recency effects for recall of serial order. These effects are consistent regardless of memory set length.]]

The suffix effect is an effect that removes the recency effect by adding in a meaningless item at the end of the original memory set. The belief is that this meaningless item will be remembered instead of the second-to-last item which was originally remembered due to the recency effect. However, the suffix effect varies based on the similarity of the item to the set. For visual stimuli, adding in the meaningless item, whether or not it is visually similar to the original memory set, will remove the recency effect. For auditory stimuli, adding in the meaningless item will only remove the recency effect if it is phonologically similar. Adding an item that is phonologically different (e.g. A, Q) will not have this effect.<ref name=Parmienterr>Parmentier, F. B., Tremblay, S., & Jones, D. M. (2004). Exploring the suffix effect in serial visuospatial short-term memory. ''Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 11''(2).</ref>

Line 49:

One popular model that has been used to organize serial memory processing is the [[ACT-R]]. ACT-R model is Adaptive Control of Thought-Rational. This cognitive architecture has been used to help hierarchically organize serial memory. This model separates [[declarative memory]] and [[procedural memory|production memory]] into separate functions. During serial memory processing, declarative memory works to encode the physical positions of the items in the original memory set. As well, the production memory works to help organize the later recall of the items in the memory set. The ACT-R is a limited-capacity model meaning that there is a limited amount of activation available to use for processing. This limited-capacity helps to explain the linear relationship between time of recall and size of memory set. According to the ACT-R, the longer the original memory set, the longer the recall because the amount of available activation is being divided amongst more items now.<ref name=Anderson>Anderson, J. R., & Matessa, M. (1997). A production system theory of serial memory. ''Psychological Review, 104''(4).</ref> More evidence exists for the ACT-R modeling serial memory processing. It has been found that the ACT-R models the serial position error<ref name=Naire /> nearly perfectly. It produces the same primacy and recency effects found in earlier studies.<ref name=Anderson /> As well, the ACT-R has been found to model acoustic errors<ref name=Bjork /> nearly perfectly. It demonstrates the same findings of phonologically similar and different items found in earlier studies.<ref name=Anderson />

Another model of serial memory processing is the model for item recognition. This model helps to explain how items in the memory set are compared to the target item. It explains the processes that go into the response decision of whether the target item was present in the original memory set of items. Firstly, this model states that after the target item, being compared to the memory set, is presented, it is then [[encoding (memory)|encoded]] into the brain. The next step is to complete serial comparisons based on the mental representation of the memory items and the target item. These comparisons are completed serially, in order, and are affected by the size of the original memory set. Where the longer the original memory set of items, the longer it will take to complete the comparisons. While comparisons are being done, there is a binary decision being made for each comparison. This decision is either positive or negative, depending on whether the target item matches the representation of an item in the memory set. After each comparison, and individual decision, is completed, the responses are organized and finally expressed. This model demonstrates the relationships between lengths of memory set and longer recall time. As well, this model focuses on exhaustive processing, where all comparisons are made, regardless of whether a positive response was found.<ref name=Sternbergg />

It has been found that confusability in the items in the memory set can affect item recognition. Auditory and phonological confusability in the memory set is associated with increased encoding time. As well, visual confusability in the memory set is associated with increased comparison time. It is shown that the modality of the items can affect different processes in item recognition.<ref name=Connor>Connor, J. M. (1972). Serial and parallel encoding processes in memory and visual search. ''Journal of Experimental Psychology, 96''(2).</ref>