↓ Skip to main content

Differences in Verbal and Visuospatial Forward and Backward Order Recall: A Review of the Literature

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
117 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
Differences in Verbal and Visuospatial Forward and Backward Order Recall: A Review of the Literature
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00663
Pubmed ID
Authors

Enrica Donolato, David Giofrè, Irene C. Mammarella

Abstract

How sequential, verbal and visuospatial stimuli are encoded and stored in memory is not clear in cognitive psychology. Studies with order recall tasks, such as the digit, and Corsi span, indicate that order of presentation is a crucial element for verbal memory, but not for visuospatial memory. This seems to be due to the different effects of forward and backward recall in verbal and visuospatial tasks. In verbal span tasks, performance is worse when recalling things in backward sequence rather than the original forward sequence. In contrast, when it comes to visuospatial tasks, performance is not always worse for a modified backward sequence. However, worse performance in backward visuospatial recall is evident in individuals with weak visuospatial abilities; such individuals perform worse in the backward version of visuospatial tasks than in the forward version. The main aim of the present review is to summarize findings on order recall in verbal and visuospatial materials by considering both cognitive and neural correlates. The results of this review will be considered in the light of the current models of WM, and will be used to make recommendations for future studies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 117 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 19%
Student > Master 15 13%
Student > Bachelor 14 12%
Researcher 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 34 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 42 36%
Neuroscience 10 9%
Engineering 5 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 41 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 04 May 2017.
All research outputs
#14,431,072
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#14,696
of 31,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,098
of 312,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#359
of 579 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,443 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
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 312,033 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 579 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.