Abstract
In the traditional Sternberg (1966) paradigm, response latency increases linearly with increases in the size of the positive set (the set-size effect). The results of four experiments converge on the conclusion that this set-size effect depends on a delay before the presentation of the memory probe. In Experiment 1, subjects were required to respond as soon as a repetition occurred in a series of digits. Despite the similarity of this task to memory-search tasks that invariably show set-size effects, there was no increase in response latency with increasing series length. Neither the inclusion of negative trials (Experiment 2) nor the explicit designation of the test digit (Experiment 3) resulted in the typical set-size effect. However, the introduction of a 1-sec preprobe delay (Experiment 4) resulted in a set-size effect of 31 msec/item.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aubé, M., &Murdock, B. (1974). Sensory stores and nigh-speed scanning.Memory & Cognition,2, 27–33.
Baddeley, A. D., &Ecob, J. R. (1973). Reaction time and short-term memory: Implications of repetition effects for the nigh-speed exhaustive scan hypothesis.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,25, 229–240.
Burrows, D., &Okada, R. (1971). Serial position effects in nigh-speed memory search.Perception & Psychophysics,10, 305–308.
CavaNagh, J. P. (1972). Relation between the immediate memory span and the memory search rate.Psychological Review,79, 525–530.
Cavanagh, J. P. (1976). Holographic and trace strength models of rehearsal effects in the item recognition task.Memory & Cognition,4, 186–199.
CLifton, C., &Birenbbaum, S. (1970). Effects of serial position and delay of probe in a memory scan task.Journal of Experimental Psychology,86, 69–76.
Corballis, M. C. (1967). Serial order in recognition and recall.Journal of Experimental Psychology,74, 99–105.
Corballs, M. C., Kirby, J., &Miller, A. (1972). Access to elements of a memorized listJournal of Experimental Psychology,94, 185–190
Corcoran, D. W. J. (1971).Pattern recognition Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books.
Diener, D., &Smee, W. P. (1984). Apple tachistoscope.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,16, 540–544.
Egeth, H., Marcus, N., &Bevan, W. (1972) Target-set and response set interactional: Implications for models of human information processing.Science,176, 1447–1448.
Glass, A. L. (1984) Effect of memory set on reaction time In J R.Anderson & S. MKosslyn (Eds),Tutorials in learning and memory (pp 119–136). San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
Howling, J. H. (1975) The attentional demands of negation in a memory-scanning task.Memory & Cognition,3, 319–324
Krueger, L. E. (1975) The effect of an added memory set on item recognition A test of parallel-dependent vs serial-comparison modelsMemory & Cognition,3, 485–495.
Morin, R. E., DE Rosa, D. V., &Stultz, V. (1967). Recognition memory and reaction time.Acta Psychologica,27, 298–305
Nickerson, R. S. (1967). Expectancy, waiting time and the psychological refractory period.Acta Psychologica,27, 23–34.
Sternberg, S. (1966). High-speed scanning in human memory.Science,153, 652–654.
Sternberg, S. (1969). Memory scanning. Mental processes revealed by reaction-time experiments.American Scientist,57, 421–457.
Sternberg, S. (1975) Memory scanning New findings and current controversiesQuarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,27, 1–32.
Townsend, J. T. (1971). A note on the identifiability of parallel and serial processes.Perception & Psychophysics,10, 161–163
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Diener, D. Absence tasks of the set-size effect in memory-search in the absence of a preprobe delay. Memory & Cognition 16, 367–376 (1988). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197048
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197048