Similarities between the irrelevant sound effect and the suffix effect

Although articulatory suppression abolishes the effect of irrelevant sound (ISE) on serial recall when sequences are presented visually, the effect persists with auditory presentation of list items. Two experiments were designed to test the claim that, when articulation is suppressed, the effect of irrelevant sound on the retention of auditory lists resembles a suffix effect. A suffix is a spoken word that immediately follows the final item in a list. Even though participants are told to ignore it, the suffix impairs serial recall of auditory lists. In Experiment 1, the irrelevant sound consisted of instrumental music. The music generated a significant ISE that was abolished by articulatory suppression. It therefore appears that, when articulation is suppressed, irrelevant sound must contain speech for it to have any effect on recall. This is consistent with what is known about the suffix effect. In Experiment 2, the effect of irrelevant sound under articulatory suppression was greater when the irrelevant sound was spoken by the same voice that presented the list items. This outcome is again consistent with the known characteristics of the suffix effect. It therefore appears that, when rehearsal is suppressed, irrelevant sound disrupts the acoustic-perceptual encoding of auditorily presented list items. There is no evidence that the persistence of the ISE under suppression is a result of interference to the representation of list items in a postcategorical phonological store

RECAPP-XPR: A smartphone application for presenting and recalling experimentally controlled stimuli over longer timescales

We report two experiments that used smartphone applications for presenting and recalling verbal stimuli over extended timescales. In Experiment 1, we used an iPhone application that we had developed, called RECAPP-XPR, to present 76 participants with a single list of eight words presented at a rate of one word every hour, followed by a test of free recall an hour later. The experiment was exceptionally easy to schedule, taking only between 5 and 10 min to set up using a web-based interface. RECAPP-XPR randomly samples the stimuli, presents the stimuli, and collects the free recall data. The stimuli disappear shortly after they have been presented, and RECAPP-XPR collects data on when each stimulus was viewed. In Experiment 2, the study was replicated using the widely used image-sharing application Snapchat. A total of 197 participants were tested by 38 student experimenters, who manually presented the stimuli as “snaps” of experimentally controlled stimuli using the same experimental rates that had been used in Experiment 1. Like all snaps, these stimuli disappeared from view after a very short interval. In both experiments, we observed significant recall advantages for the first and last list items (primacy and recency effects, respectively), and there were clear tendencies to make more transitions at output between near-neighboring items, with a forward-ordered bias, consistent with temporal contiguity effects. The respective advantages and disadvantages of RECAPP-XPR and Snapchat as experimental software packages are discussed, as is the relationship between single-study-list smartphone experiments and long-term recency studies of real-world events

What memory is

I argue that our current practice of ascribing the term “ memory ” to mental states and processes lacks epistemic warrant. Memory, according to the “received view”, is any state or process that results from the sequential stages of encoding, storage and retrieval. By these criteria, memory, or its footprint, can be seen in virtually every mental state we are capable of having. This, I argue, stretches the term to the breaking point. I draw on phenomenological, historical and conceptual considerations to make the case that an act of memory entails a direct, non-inferential feeling of re-acquaintance with one’s past. It does so by linking content retrieved from storage with autonoetic awareness during retrieval. On this view, memory is not the content of experience, but the manner in which that content is experienced. I discuss some theoretical and practical implications and advantages of adopting this more nuanced view of memory. -/