↓ Skip to main content

Recalling visual serial order for verbal sequences

Overview of attention for article published in Memory & Cognition, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Recalling visual serial order for verbal sequences
Published in
Memory & Cognition, December 2015
DOI 10.3758/s13421-015-0580-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert H. Logie, Satoru Saito, Aiko Morita, Samarth Varma, Dennis Norris

Abstract

We report three experiments in which participants performed written serial recall of visually presented verbal sequences with items varying in visual similarity. In Experiments 1 and 2 native speakers of Japanese recalled visually presented Japanese Kanji characters. In Experiment 3, native speakers of English recalled visually presented words. In all experiments, items varied in visual similarity and were controlled for phonological similarity. For Kanji and for English, performance on lists comprising visually similar items was overall poorer than for lists of visually distinct items across all serial positions. For mixed lists in which visually similar and visually distinct items alternated through the list, a clear "zig-zag" pattern appeared with better recall of the visually distinct items than for visually similar items. This is the first time that this zig-zag pattern has been shown for manipulations of visual similarity in serial-ordered recall. These data provide new evidence that retaining a sequence of visual codes relies on similar principles to those that govern the retention of a sequence of phonological codes. We further illustrate this by demonstrating that the data patterns can be readily simulated by at least one computational model of serial-ordered recall, the Primacy model (Page and Norris, Psychological Review, 105(4), 761-81, 1998). Together with previous evidence from neuropsychological studies and experimental studies with healthy adults, these results are interpreted as consistent with two domain-specific, limited-capacity, temporary memory systems for phonological material and for visual material, respectively, each of which uses similar processes that have evolved to be optimal for retention of serial order.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 57 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 22%
Researcher 12 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 12%
Student > Master 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 9 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 21 36%
Neuroscience 5 9%
Linguistics 4 7%
Arts and Humanities 3 5%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 13 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 December 2015.
All research outputs
#18,433,196
of 22,836,570 outputs
Outputs from Memory & Cognition
#1,372
of 1,572 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#281,953
of 390,633 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Memory & Cognition
#21
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,836,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,572 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 390,633 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.