Order information and free recall: Evaluating the item-order hypothesis

2007 ◽  
Vol 60 (5) ◽  
pp. 732-751 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil W. Mulligan ◽  
Jeffrey P. Lozito
2003 ◽  
Vol 67 (4) ◽  
pp. 280-290 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Engelkamp ◽  
Petra Jahn ◽  
Kerstin H. Seiler

Author(s):  
Ian Neath ◽  
Philip T. Quinlan

AbstractAccording to the item/order hypothesis, high-frequency words are processed more efficiently and therefore order information can be readily encoded. In contrast, low-frequency words are processed less efficiently and the focus on item-specific processing compromises order information. Most experiments testing this account use free recall, which has led to two problems: First, the role of order information is difficult to evaluate in free recall, and second, the data from free recall show all three possible patterns of results: memory for high-frequency words can be better than, the same as, or worse than that for low-frequency words. A series of experiments tested the item/order hypothesis using tests where the role of order information is less ambiguous. The item/order hypothesis predicts better performance for high- than low-frequency words when pure lists are used in both immediate serial recall (ISR) and serial reconstruction of order (SRO) tests. In contrast, when mixed (alternating) lists are used, it predicts better performance for low- than for high-frequency words with ISR tests, but equivalent performance with SRO tests. The experiments generally confirm these predictions, with the notable exception of a block order effect in SRO tasks: When a block of low-frequency lists preceded a block of high-frequency lists, a high-frequency advantage was observed but when a block of high-frequency lists preceded a block of low-frequency lists, no frequency effect was observed. A final experiment provides evidence that this block order effect is due to metacognitive factors.


1965 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 877-883 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas L. Rohrman ◽  
John C. Jahnke

A total of 300 university students were presented a brief list of non-alphanumeric items and instructed to recall immediately either the items (free recall, FR), the order in which the items were presented (order recall, OR), or both (serial recall, SR). Presentation rate and retention interval were additional experimental variables in Exp. I and II, respectively. In both experiments significant differences in recall were found between FR conditions and the remaining two, which did not differ from each other. More items were recalled at the slow than fas: rate. Retention interval was not a significant variable. Results suggest that retention will improve when order information is eliminated from recall (Brown, 1958), that the recall of item and order information involve at least partially independent memory processes, and that, while the recall of items may proceed independently of the recall of their order, the converse is not true.


1998 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 615-636 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Philip Beaman ◽  
Dylan M. Jones

The claim that the sensitivity of free recall to disruption by irrelevant sound is a function of the extent to which rote rehearsal is employed as a mnemonic strategy was investigated in two experiments. The degree of disruption by irrelevant sound in terms of both item and order information was contrasted under serial and free recall instructions. Irrelevant sound was found to disrupt order and item information equally in serial and free recall tasks (Experiment 1). Contrary to previous reports, an effect of irrelevant sound was also demonstrated on free recall of particularly long lists, and the interaction between list length and retention interval in the irrelevant sound effect was examined (Experiment 2). Generally, the results support the view that irrelevant sound disrupts the use of order cues.


1985 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 556-565 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane M. Kirchner ◽  
Roberta L. Klatzky

Twelve language-disordered (mean age 10:7) and 12 normal children (mean age 10:10) received a series of free-recall lists composed of pictorial items. They were instructed to rehearse aloud after each item. From the rehearsal periods and recalls 12 variables were calculated. They represented retention of item and order information, semantic organization, effects of primacy and recency in input order, repetition, and intrusion errors. These variables were submitted to factor and discriminant analyses and linear regression; the intrusion errors were also classified. The analyses suggest that rehearsal and recall reflect three components: capacity for item and order information, semantic organization, and susceptibility to non-list intrusion. The predominant differences between groups were in capacity and intrusions. The memory deficits of the language-disordered subjects are described as diminished verbal capacity, a description that has implications for the relationship between language and memory and the specific nature of the disorder.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document