根据填充倾向的大小(而不是存在程度)来跟踪序列顺序的依赖于项目的线索。

IF 3.2 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Dakota R B Lindsey, Tyler L Harrison
{"title":"根据填充倾向的大小(而不是存在程度)来跟踪序列顺序的依赖于项目的线索。","authors":"Dakota R B Lindsey, Tyler L Harrison","doi":"10.3758/s13423-025-02684-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In tasks that measure serial-order memory, it is common to observe a \"fill-in tendency\"-when a person skips an item, the next item they report is more likely to be the skipped item (a fill-in response) than the next list item (an infill response). They tend to \"fill in\" the blank they skipped. The fill-in tendency has informed the modeling of serial-order memory-it presents strong evidence against associative chaining accounts because they predict more infill responses than fill-in responses. Despite the failures of associative chaining theories, evidence grows for the use of chaining-like item-dependent cues in serial-order memory. In this paper, we analyzed fill-in and infill responses from nine serial learning experiments (one new experiment and eight previously published experiments) that used variants of the spin list procedure and found strong evidence of item-dependent retrieval cues in serial-order memory. The current analyses revealed a fill-in tendency in all lists-even in those in which item-dependent cues were suspected to have been used. However, in those lists the likelihood of infill responses was higher, and consequently, the fill-in tendency was weaker. Our results expose a flaw in the conventional understanding of fill-in and infill responses. That is, the presence (or absence) of the fill-in tendency is not a strong test of item-dependent cues. Instead, changes in the magnitude of the fill-in tendency-more specifically, an increase in the likelihood of infill responses-across task conditions seem to better indicate the use of item-dependent cues.</p>","PeriodicalId":20763,"journal":{"name":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Item-dependent cues in serial order are tracked by the magnitude (not the presence) of the fill-in tendency.\",\"authors\":\"Dakota R B Lindsey, Tyler L Harrison\",\"doi\":\"10.3758/s13423-025-02684-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In tasks that measure serial-order memory, it is common to observe a \\\"fill-in tendency\\\"-when a person skips an item, the next item they report is more likely to be the skipped item (a fill-in response) than the next list item (an infill response). They tend to \\\"fill in\\\" the blank they skipped. The fill-in tendency has informed the modeling of serial-order memory-it presents strong evidence against associative chaining accounts because they predict more infill responses than fill-in responses. Despite the failures of associative chaining theories, evidence grows for the use of chaining-like item-dependent cues in serial-order memory. In this paper, we analyzed fill-in and infill responses from nine serial learning experiments (one new experiment and eight previously published experiments) that used variants of the spin list procedure and found strong evidence of item-dependent retrieval cues in serial-order memory. The current analyses revealed a fill-in tendency in all lists-even in those in which item-dependent cues were suspected to have been used. However, in those lists the likelihood of infill responses was higher, and consequently, the fill-in tendency was weaker. Our results expose a flaw in the conventional understanding of fill-in and infill responses. That is, the presence (or absence) of the fill-in tendency is not a strong test of item-dependent cues. Instead, changes in the magnitude of the fill-in tendency-more specifically, an increase in the likelihood of infill responses-across task conditions seem to better indicate the use of item-dependent cues.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20763,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-025-02684-8\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-025-02684-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在测量序列记忆的任务中,通常可以观察到“填空倾向”——当一个人跳过一个项目时,他们报告的下一个项目更有可能是被跳过的项目(填空响应),而不是下一个列表项目(填空响应)。他们倾向于“填补”他们跳过的空白。填充倾向已经为序列顺序记忆的建模提供了信息——它提供了强有力的证据来反对联想链解释,因为它们预测的填充反应多于填充反应。尽管联想链理论的失败,证据越来越多的链式项目依赖线索在序列顺序记忆的使用。在本文中,我们分析了9个系列学习实验(一个新实验和8个先前发表的实验)的填充和填充反应,这些实验使用了旋转列表过程的变体,并发现了序列顺序记忆中项目依赖检索线索的有力证据。目前的分析显示,在所有的列表中都有一种填空的趋势——即使在那些被怀疑使用了依赖于项目的线索的列表中也是如此。然而,在这些列表中,填充响应的可能性较高,因此,填充倾向较弱。我们的结果暴露了对填充和填充响应的传统理解中的一个缺陷。也就是说,填空倾向的存在(或不存在)并不是对项目依赖线索的有力测试。相反,填空倾向的变化幅度——更具体地说,填空反应可能性的增加——在不同的任务条件下似乎更好地表明了项目依赖线索的使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Item-dependent cues in serial order are tracked by the magnitude (not the presence) of the fill-in tendency.

In tasks that measure serial-order memory, it is common to observe a "fill-in tendency"-when a person skips an item, the next item they report is more likely to be the skipped item (a fill-in response) than the next list item (an infill response). They tend to "fill in" the blank they skipped. The fill-in tendency has informed the modeling of serial-order memory-it presents strong evidence against associative chaining accounts because they predict more infill responses than fill-in responses. Despite the failures of associative chaining theories, evidence grows for the use of chaining-like item-dependent cues in serial-order memory. In this paper, we analyzed fill-in and infill responses from nine serial learning experiments (one new experiment and eight previously published experiments) that used variants of the spin list procedure and found strong evidence of item-dependent retrieval cues in serial-order memory. The current analyses revealed a fill-in tendency in all lists-even in those in which item-dependent cues were suspected to have been used. However, in those lists the likelihood of infill responses was higher, and consequently, the fill-in tendency was weaker. Our results expose a flaw in the conventional understanding of fill-in and infill responses. That is, the presence (or absence) of the fill-in tendency is not a strong test of item-dependent cues. Instead, changes in the magnitude of the fill-in tendency-more specifically, an increase in the likelihood of infill responses-across task conditions seem to better indicate the use of item-dependent cues.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
2.90%
发文量
165
期刊介绍: The journal provides coverage spanning a broad spectrum of topics in all areas of experimental psychology. The journal is primarily dedicated to the publication of theory and review articles and brief reports of outstanding experimental work. Areas of coverage include cognitive psychology broadly construed, including but not limited to action, perception, & attention, language, learning & memory, reasoning & decision making, and social cognition. We welcome submissions that approach these issues from a variety of perspectives such as behavioral measurements, comparative psychology, development, evolutionary psychology, genetics, neuroscience, and quantitative/computational modeling. We particularly encourage integrative research that crosses traditional content and methodological boundaries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信