A temporal distinctiveness theory of recency and modality effects.

A temporal distinctiveness theory of contextually cued retrieval from memory is presented and applied to recency and modality effects. According to this theory, one part of the mnemonic trace of an item is a representation of the item's time of presentation. Time of presentation may be encoded with a coarse grain (so that it is consistent with a wide range of times) or with a fine grain (so that it is consistent with a narrow range of times). Retrieval proceeds by constructing temporally defined search sets that include representations of items consistent with the temporal bounds of the search set. The temporal width of the search set increases as the retention interval increases. Recency effects arise from retrieval of recently presented items from narrow search sets that include representations of few items; within the context of the search set, these items are distinctive and recalled well. Superiority in recall of recently presented auditory information in comparison with recently presented visual information is attributed to differences in the grain of time of presentation representations for aurally (fine grain) and visually (coarse grain) presented information. Four experiments confirm qualitative and quantitative predictions of the theory, including the prediction of auditory superiority at the beginning of the list when the initial items are temporally distinct.

[1]  HighWire Press Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London , 1781, The London Medical Journal.

[2]  D. Yntema,et al.  Recall as a search process , 1963 .

[3]  N. C. Waugh,et al.  Short-term memory and intertrial interval , 1967 .

[4]  B. Murdock Modality effects in short-term memory: storage or retrieval? , 1968, Journal of experimental psychology.

[5]  R. G. Crowder,et al.  Precategorical acoustic storage (PAS) , 1969 .

[6]  F. Craik Modality effects in short-term storage , 1969 .

[7]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Models Of Human Memory , 1970 .

[8]  Robert G. Crowder,et al.  The Modality Effect in Free and Serial Recall as a Function of Phonological Similarity. , 1974 .

[9]  R. Bjork,et al.  Recency-sensitive retrieval processes in long-term free recall☆ , 1974 .

[10]  David Salter,et al.  Maintaining Recency despite a Stimulus Suffix , 1975 .

[11]  B. Murdock,et al.  The effects of visual presentation method on single-trial free recall , 1975, Memory & cognition.

[12]  M. Watkins,et al.  Buildup of Proactive Inhibition as a Cue-Overload Effect. , 1975 .

[13]  Long-Term Recency Effects in Free Recall. , 1977 .

[14]  D. Polzella,et al.  Cerebral asymmetry in time perception , 1977 .

[15]  David A. Routh,et al.  The Basis and Implications of the Restoration of a Recency Effect in Immediate Serial Recall , 1978 .

[16]  John M. Gardiner,et al.  When auditory memory is not overwritten , 1979 .

[17]  T. Ayres Differing suffix effects for the same physical suffix. , 1979 .

[18]  B. Murdock,et al.  Order of recall, output interference, and the modality effect , 1979 .

[19]  R. Campbell,et al.  Hearing by Eye , 1980, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[20]  M. Watkins,et al.  Suffix effects manifest and concealed: Further evidence for a 20-second echo , 1980 .

[21]  M. Bradley,et al.  A two-process account of long-term serial position effects , 1980 .

[22]  M J Watkins,et al.  The modality effect and echoic persistence. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[23]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory , 1980 .

[24]  R. Shiffrin,et al.  Search of associative memory. , 1981 .

[25]  Randall W. Engle,et al.  Structural and strategic factors in the stimulus suffix effect , 1981 .

[26]  E. Klima,et al.  Nonauditory suffix effects in congenitally deaf signers of American Sign Language. , 1981, Journal of experimental psychology. Human learning and memory.

[27]  J. Metcalfe,et al.  Spatial and temporal processing in the auditory and visual modalities , 1981, Memory & cognition.

[28]  How long does the modality effect persist , 1982 .

[29]  A. Baddeley Domains of recollection. , 1982 .

[30]  F. Bellezza Updating memory using mnemonic devices , 1982, Cognitive Psychology.

[31]  W. E. Wilsoncroft,et al.  Auditory and Visual Differences in Time Perception , 1983, Perceptual and motor skills.

[32]  Repeated recall: A new model and tests of its generality from childhood to old age , 1983 .

[33]  M. Bradley,et al.  Studies of the long-term recency effect: Support for a contextually guided retrieval hypothesis. , 1983 .

[34]  J M Gardiner,et al.  On recency and echoic memory. , 1983, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[35]  J. S. Nairne,et al.  Silent mouthing produces modality- and suffix-like effects. , 1983 .

[36]  Michael J. Watkins,et al.  Three recency effects at the same time , 1983 .

[37]  P. Fraisse Perception and estimation of time. , 1984, Annual review of psychology.

[38]  V. Gregg,et al.  Phonological Similarity and Enhanced Auditory Recency in Longer-Term Free Recall , 1984 .

[39]  R. G. Crowder,et al.  Effects of Semantic Similarity on Long-Term Recency , 1984 .

[40]  A M Glenberg A retrieval account of the long-term modality effect. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[41]  R. G. Crowder,et al.  Modality and suffix effects in the absence of auditory stimulation , 1984 .

[42]  A. Glenberg,et al.  Differential Influence of the Recall and Postlist Instruction Modalities on the Long-Term Modality Effect , 1985 .

[43]  The role of visual interference in producing the long-term modality effect , 1987, Memory & cognition.