Three experiments investigated the effect of word length on a serial recognition task when rehearsal was prevented by a high presentation rate with no delay between study and test lists. Results showed that lists of short four-phoneme words were better recognized than lists of long six-phoneme words. Moreover, this effect was equivalent to that observed in conditions in which there was a delay between lists, thereby making rehearsal possible in the interval. These findings imply that rehearsal does not play a central role in the origin of the word length effect. An alternative explanation based on differences in the degree of retroactive interference generated by long and short words is proposed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllportD. A. (1984). Auditory-verbal short-term memory and conduction aphasia.Attention and performance X: Control of language processes. BoumaH.BouwhuisD. G.Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates313–326.
2.
BaddeleyA. D. (1986). Working memoryNew York: Clarendon/Oxford University Press.
3.
BaddeleyA. D.ChincottaD.StaffordL.TurkD. (2002). Is the word length effect in STM entirely attributable to output delay? Evidence from serial recognition.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology55A, 353–369.
4.
BaddeleyA. D.LewisV.VallarG. (1984). Exploring the articulatory loop.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology36A, 233–252.
5.
BaddeleyA. D.ThomsonN.BuchananM. (1975). Word length and the structure of short-term memory.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior14, 575–589.
6.
BrownG. D. A.HulmeC. (1995). Modeling item length effects in memory span: No rehearsal needed?.Journal of Memory and Language34, 594–621.
7.
BurgessN.HitchG. J. (1999). Memory for serial order: A network model of the phonological loop and its timing.Psychological Review106, 551–581.
8.
CampoyG. (2007). Retroactive interference in short-term memory and the word-length effect. Manuscript submitted for publication.
9.
CaplanD.RochonE.WatersG. S. (1992). Articulatory and phonological determinants of word length effects in span tasks.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology45A, 177–192.
10.
ColtheartV.LangdonR. (1998). Recall of short word lists presented visually at fast rates: Effects of phonological similarity and word length.Memory and Cognition26, 330–342.
11.
CowanN.BaddeleyA. D.ElliottE. M.NorrisJ. (2003). List composition and the word length effect in immediate recall: A comparison of localist and globalist assumptions.Psychonomic Bulletin and Review10, 74–79.
12.
CowanN.DayL.SaultsJ. S.KellerT. A. (1992). The role of verbal output time in the effects of word length on immediate memory.Journal of Memory and Language31, 1–17.
13.
CowanN.NugentL. D.ElliottE. M. (2000). Memory-search and rehearsal processes and the word length effect in immediate recall: A synthesis in reply to Service.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology53A, 666–670.
14.
CowanN.WoodN. L.NugentL. D.TreismanM. (1997). There are two word-length effects in verbal short-term memory: Opposed effects of duration and complexity.Psychological Science8, 290–295.
15.
DavelaarE. J.Goshen-GottsteinY.AshkenaziA.HaarmannH. J.UsherM. (2005). The demise of short-term memory revisited: Empirical and computational investigations of recency effects.Psychological Review112, 3–42.
16.
DosherB. A. (1999). Item interference and time delays in working memory: Immediate serial recall.International Journal of Psychology34, 276–284.
17.
DosherB. A.MaJ. J. (1998). Output loss or rehearsal loop? Output-time versus pronunciation-time limits in immediate recall for forgetting-matched materials.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition24, 316–335.
18.
GathercoleS. E.PickeringS. J.HallM.PeakerS. M. (2001). Dissociable lexical and phonological influences on serial recognition and serial recall.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology54A, 1–30.
19.
HulmeC.MaughanS.BrownG. D. A. (1991). Memory for familiar and unfamiliar words: Evidence for a long-term memory contribution to short-term span.Journal of Memory and Language30, 685–701.
20.
HulmeC.SurprenantA. M.BiretaT. J.StuartG.NeathI. (2004). Abolishing the word-length effect.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition30, 98–106.
21.
LovattP.AvonsS. E.MastersonJ. (2000). The word-length effect and disyllabic words.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology53A, 1–22.
22.
MuellerS. T.SeymourT. L.KierasD. E.MeyerD. E. (2003). Theoretical implications of articulatory duration, phonological similarity, and phonological complexity in verbal working memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition29, 1353–1380.
23.
NairneJ. S. (1990). A feature model of immediate memory.Memory and Cognition18, 251–269.
24.
NairneJ. S. (2002). Remembering over the short-term: The case against the standard model.Annual Review of Psychology53, 53–81.
25.
NeathI.BiretaT. J.SurprenantA. M. (2003a). The time-based word length effect and stimulus set specificity.Psychonomic Bulletin and Review10, 430–434.
26.
NeathI.FarleyL. A.SurprenantA. M. (2003b). Directly assessing the relationship between irrelevant speech and articulatory suppression.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology56A, 1269–1278.
27.
NeathI.NairneJ. S. (1995). Word-length effects in immediate memory: Overwriting trace decay theory.Psychonomic Bulletin and Review2, 429–441.
28.
NeathI.SurprenantA. M.LeCompteD. C. (1998). Irrelevant speech eliminates the word length effect.Memory and Cognition26, 343–354.
29.
NorrisD.BaddeleyA. D.PageM. P. A. (2004). Retroactive effects of irrelevant speech on serial recall from short-term memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition30, 1093–1105.
30.
PollackI.NormanD. A. (1964). A non-parametric analysis of recognition experiments.Psychonomic Science1, 125–126.
31.
RomaniC.McAlpineS.OlsonA.TsouknidaE.MartinR. (2005). Length, lexicality, and articulatory suppression in immediate recall: Evidence against the articulatory loop.Journal of Memory and Language52, 406–423.
32.
SchneiderW.EschmanA.ZuccolottoA. (2002). E-Prime user's guidePittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools, Inc.
33.
SchweickertR. (1993). A multinomial processing tree model for degradation and redintegration in immediate recall.Memory and Cognition21, 168–175.
34.
SebastiánN.MartíM. A.CarreirasM.CuetosF. (2000). LEXESP. Léxico informatizado del españolBarcelona, Spain: Ediciones de la Universidad de Barcelona.
35.
ServiceE. (1998). The effect of word length on immediate serial recall depends on phonological complexity, not articulatory duration.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology51A, 283–304.
36.
UsherM.CohenJ. D. (1999). Short-term memory and selection processes in a frontal-lobe model.Connectionist models in cognitive neuroscience. HeinkeD.HumphriesG. W.OlsenA.London: Springer-Verlag78–91.
