How is information from different content domains bound together into a representation of the whole sequence? Several theories predict that mixing information from different domains specifically impairs the ordering of information from different domains, whereas ordering within domains might be enhanced. In contrast, domain-general models—in which items from different domains are simply assumed to be less confusable—predict that mixing items from different domains enhances ordering, as the list items will on average be less confusable. The results of an experiment showed an overall advantage for mixed over pure lists in ordering information, supporting the domain-general viewpoint. Simulations with a representative domain-general model—the start–end model of Henson [(1998). Short-term memory for serial order: The start-end model. Cognitive Psychology, 36, 73–137] —showed that the model gave a satisfactory account of the data. Together, the data and simulations lend evidence to the idea that a domain-general mechanism is responsible for ordering stimuli from different domains, and that domain-specific effects are attributable to the relative similarity of item representations.
AllenR., HitchG., & BaddeleyA. (2009). Cross-modal binding and working memory. Visual Cognition, 17, 83–102.
2.
BaddeleyA. D. (1968). How does acoustic similarity influence short-term memory?. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 249–263.
3.
BaddeleyA. D. (1986). Working memory, New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
4.
BaddeleyA. D. (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory?. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 417–423.
5.
BjorkE. L., & HealyA. F. (1974). Short-term order and item retention. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 80–97.
6.
BrahmbhattS. B., McAuleyT., & BarchD. M. (2008). Functional developmental similarities and differences in the neural correlates of verbal and nonverbal working memory tasks. Neuropsychologia, 46, 1020–1031.
7.
BrainardD. H. (1997). The Psychophysics Toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433–436.
8.
BroadbentD., & GregoryM. (1964). Stimulus set and response set: The alternation of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 16, 309–317.
9.
BrownG. D. A., NeathI., & ChaterN. (2007). A temporal ratio model of memory. Psychological Review, 114, 539–576.
10.
BrownG. D. A., PreeceT., & HulmeC. (2000). Oscillator-based memory for serial order. Psychological Review, 107, 127–181.
11.
BurgessN., & HitchG. J. (1999). Memory for serial order: A network model of the phonological loop and its timing. Psychological Review, 106, 551–581.
12.
BurgessN., & HitchG. J. (2006). A revised model of short-term memory and long-term learning of verbal sequences. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 627–652.
13.
CowanN. (2000). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 87–185.
14.
DepoorterA., & VandierendonckA. (2009). Evidence for modality-independent order coding in working memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 531–549.
15.
FarrellS. (2006). Mixed-list phonological similarity effects in delayed serial recall. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 587–600.
16.
FarrellS. (2012). Temporal clustering and sequencing in working memory and episodic memory. Psychological Review, 119, 223–271.
17.
FarrellS., & LewandowskyS. (2002). An endogenous distributed model of ordering in serial recall. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 59–79.
18.
HensonR. N. A. (1998). Short-term memory for serial order: The start–end model. Cognitive Psychology, 36, 73–137.
19.
HensonR. N. A., NorrisD. G., PageM. P. A., & BaddeleyA. D. (1996). Unchained memory: Error patterns rule out chaining models of immediate serial recall. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A, 80–115.
20.
JohnsonA. J., & MilesC. (2009). Single-probe serial position recall: Evidence of modularity for olfactory, visual, and auditory short-term memory. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 267–275.
21.
LewandowskyS. (1999). Redintegration and response suppression in serial recall: A dynamic network model. In International Journal of Psychology, 34, 434–446.
22.
Lewandowsky, S., & Farrell, S. (2008). Short-term memory: New data and a model. In B. H. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 49, pp. 1–48). London, England: Elsevier.
23.
LewandowskyS., & MurdockB. B. (1989). Memory for serial order. Psychological Review, 96, 25–57.
24.
Majerus, S., D'Argembeau, A., Perez, T. M., Belayachi, S., Van der Linden, M., Collette, F., … Maquet, P. (2010). The commonality of neural networks for verbal and visual short-term memory. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22, 2570–2593.
25.
MarshuetzC. (2005). Order information in working memory: An integrative review of evidence from brain and behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 323–339.
26.
NystromL. E., BraverT. S., SabbF. W., DelgadoM. R., NollD. C., & CohenJ. D. (2000). Working memory for letters, shapes, and locations: fMRI evidence against stimulus-based regional organization in human prefrontal cortex. NeuroImage, 11, 424–446.
27.
OberauerK. (2005). Binding and inhibition in working memory: Individual and age differences in short-term recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 368–387.
28.
OberauerK., & BialkovaS. (2011). Serial and parallel processes in working memory after practice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 606–614.
29.
OberauerK., LewandowskyS., FarrellS., JarroldC., & GreavesM. (2012). Modeling working memory: An interference model of complex span. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 779–819.
30.
OberauerK., & VockenbergK. (2009). Updating of working memory: Lingering bindings. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 967–987.
31.
PageM. P. A., & NorrisD. (1998). The primacy model: A new model of immediate serial recall. Psychological Review, 105, 761–781.
32.
ParmentierF. B. R., & JonesD. M. (2000). Functional characteristics of auditory temporal–spatial short-term memory: Evidence from serial order errors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 222–238.
33.
ParmentierF. B. R., MayberyM. T., & JonesD. M. (2004). Temporal grouping in auditory spatial serial memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 501–507.
34.
PelliD. G. (1997). The Video Toolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10, 437–442.
35.
SandersA. F., & SchrootsJ. J. F. (1968). Cognitive categories and memory span: I. Shifting between categories. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 370–372.
36.
SmythM. M., HayD. C., HitchG. J., & HortonN. J. (2005). Serial position memory in the visual–spatial domain: Reconstructing sequences of unfamiliar faces. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58A, 909–930.
37.
ThornA. S. C., & FrankishC. R. (2005). Long-term knowledge effects on serial recall of nonwords are not exclusively lexical. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 729–735.
38.
TreismanA. M., & ZhangW. (2006). Location and binding in visual working memory. Memory & Cognition, 34, 1704–1719.
39.
WardG., AvonsS. E., & MellingL. (2005). Serial position curves in short-term memory: Functional equivalence across modalities. Memory, 13, 308–317.
40.
WheelerM. E., & TreismanA. M. (2002). Binding in short-term visual memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131, 48–64.
