CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 5Memory Processes and InfluencesNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismCognitive Functions and Memory

Access to inner language enhances memory for events

Open access
Banks, Briony, Connell, Louise·2023·Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition
DOI 10.31234/osf.io/64udy
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Events are temporally-bounded experiences involving people, objects and actions that can be segmented into sequences of smaller meaningful events (e.g., the steps involved in constructing a piece of furniture), but the role of inner language in remembering such events has been unclear. We investigated whether inner language enhances memory for events in a naturalistic, non-verbal task where participants constructed simple models from memory. Across three experiments, we used linguistic suppression in a dual-task paradigm to test whether inner language improved overall memory performance and completion time, additionally exploring the number of events that could be recalled. We found that access to inner language at encoding consistently affected memory performance: when inner language was disrupted at encoding, participants were poorer at recalling the models and remembered fewer events. This effect was present whether or not the number of events to be recalled exceed event memory capacity (estimated to be approximately 7-8 events). Critically, the effect of linguistic suppression on memory performance was greater than a control secondary task that did not affect access to language; that is, poorer performance was not solely due to dual-task effects. The results support the proposal that inner language enhances event memory via a mechanism of linguistic bootstrapping, which in turn extends theories of event memory and adds to a growing body of evidence that inner language is a highly valuable cognitive tool.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.31234/osf.io/64udy

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Disrupting inner speech through articulatory suppression during encoding affected the accuracy and number of recalled events more than other dual tasks that did not require access to language.

    “Disrupting IS through articulatory suppression during encoding affected the accuracy and number of recalled events more than other dual tasks that did not require access to language.”

    From Inner speech as language process and cognitive tool (2023) · cites this paper as [63]

    The Results and Discussion (p. 20) report poorer event-reproduction performance under linguistic suppression than under auditory monitoring during encoding. The paper also reports fewer recalled events under suppression (Discussion, p. 9), but it does not report a comparison of that count with the control task. Experiment 3 used one nonlinguistic control task, not multiple tasks. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Compared to a spatial suppression condition, articulatory suppression impaired performance in the Luria hand test, a non-verbal neuropsychological test of serial recall.

    “Compared to a spatial suppression conditionin which participants had to tap five red marks sequentiallyarticulatory suppression impaired performance in the Luria hand test (LHT), a non-verbal neuropsychological test of serial recall in which participants have to reproduce sequential movements [62].”

    From Inner speech as language process and cognitive tool (2023) · cites this paper as [62]

    The background discussion (p. 3) reports a related finding about linguistic suppression, hand gestures, and finger tapping, but does not identify the Luria hand test or the five-red-mark spatial suppression condition. The paper’s own control task was auditory monitoring (General Discussion, p. 21). Searches for the Luria hand test and the described spatial condition did not locate the attributed comparison in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 82

  1. Athanasopoulos, P., & Bylund, E. (2013). Does grammatical aspect affect motion event cognition? A cross-linguistic comparison of English and Swedish speakers. Cognitive Science , 37 (2), 286 -309. https://doi.org/10 .1111/cogs.12006
  2. Baddeley, A. (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences , 4 (11), 417 -423. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01538-2 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Baddeley, A. (1966). The in fl uence of acoustic and semantic similarity on longterm memory for word sequences. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology , 18 (4), 302 -309. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640746608400047 · DOI
  4. Baddeley, A., Chincotta, D., & Adlam, A. (2001). Working memory and the control of action: Evidence from task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 130 (4), 641 -657. https://doi.org/10.1037/00963445.130.4.641 · DOI
  5. Baddeley, A., & Hitch, G. J. (1974). Working memory. In G. Bower (Ed.), Recent advances in learning and motivation (Vol. 8, pp. 47 -89). Academic Press.
  6. Bailey, H. R., Zacks, J. M., Hambrick, D. Z., Zacks, R. T., Head, D., Kurby, C. A., & Sargent, J. Q. (2013). Medial temporal lobe volume predicts elders ' everyday memory. Psychological Science , 24 (7), 1113 -1122. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0956797612466676 · DOI
  7. Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for con fi rmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language , 68 (3), 255 -278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml .2012.11.001 · DOI
  8. Barsalou, L. W., Santos, A., Simmons, W. K., & Wilson, C. D. (2008). Language and simulation in conceptual processing. In M. de Vega, A. Glenberg, & A. Graesser (Eds.), Symbols and embodiment: Debates on meaning and cognition (pp. 245 -284). Oxford University Press. https:// doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199217274.003.0013 · DOI
  9. Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software , 67 (1), 1 -48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Bek, J., Blades, M., Siegal, M., & Varley, R. (2009). Linguistic processes in visuospatial representation: Clarifying verbal interference effects. In N. A. Taatgen & H. van Rijn (Eds.), Proceedings of the 31st Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2723 -2728). Cognitive Science Society.
  11. Borghi, A. M., Barca, L., Binkofski, F., Castelfranchi, C., Pezzulo, G., & Tummolini, L. (2019). Words as social tools: Language, sociality and inner grounding in abstract concepts. Physics of Life Reviews , 29 , 120 -153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2018.12.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2018.12.001 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Brandimonte, M. A., Hitch, G. J., & Bishop, D. V. M. (1992a). In fl uence of shortterm memory codes on visual image processing: Evidence from image transformation tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition , 18 (1), 157 -165. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.18.1.157 · DOI
  13. Brandimonte, M. A., Hitch, G. J., & Bishop, D. V. M. (1992b). Verbal recoding of visual stimuli impairs mental image transformations. Memory & Cognition , 20 (4), 449 -455. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210929 · DOI
  14. Brown, L. A., Forbes, D., & McConnell, J. (2006). Short article: Limiting the use of verbal coding in the visual patterns test. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology , 59 (7), 1169 -1176. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 17470210600665954
  15. Connell, L. (2019). What have labels ever done for us? The linguistic shortcut in conceptual processing. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience , 34 (10), 1308 -1318. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2018.1471512 https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2018.1471512 · DOI
  16. Connell, L., & Lynott, D. (2014). Principles of representation: Why you can ' t represent the same concept twice. Topics in Cognitive Science , 6 (3), 390 -406. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12097 · DOI
  17. Cowan, N. (2010). The magical mystery four: How is working memory capacity limited, and why? Current Directions in Psychological Science , 19 (1), 51 -57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721409359277 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Cragg, L., & Nation, K. (2010). Language and the development of cognitive control. Topics in Cognitive Science , 2 (4), 631 -642. https://doi.org/10 .1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01080.x
  19. Della Sala, S., Gray, C., Baddeley, A., Allamano, N., & Wilson, L. (1999). Pattern span: A tool for unwelding visuo-spatial memory. Neuropsychologia , 37 (10), 1189 -1199. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0028-3932(98)00159-6 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Dove, G. (2020). More than a scaffold: Language is a neuroenhancement. Cognitive Neuropsychology , 37 (5 -6), 288 -311. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 02643294.2019.1637338
  21. Dunbar, K., & Sussman, D. (1995). Toward a cognitive account of frontal lobe function: Simulating frontal lobe de fi cits in normal subjects. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences , 769 (1), 289 -304. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1995.tb38146.x · DOI
  22. Dymarska, A., Connell, L., & Banks, B. (2022). Linguistic bootstrapping allows more real-world object concepts to be held in mind. Collabra: Psychology , 8 (1), Article 40171. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.40171 · DOI
  23. Emerson, M. J., & Miyake, A. (2003). The role of inner speech in task switching: A dual-task investigation. Journal of Memory and Language , 48 (1), 148 -168. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-596X(02)00511-9 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Fini, C., Zannino, G. D., Orsoni, M., Carlesimo, G. A., Benassi, M., & Borghi, A. M. (2022). Articulatory suppression delays processing of abstract words: The role of inner speech. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology , 75 (7), 1343 -1354. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218211053623 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Flecken, M., Athanasopoulos, P., Kuipers, J. R., & Thierry, G. (2015). On the road to somewhere: Brain potentials re fl ect language effects on motion event perception. Cognition , 141 , 41 -51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015 .04.006 · DOI
  26. Flores, S., Bailey, H. R., Eisenberg, M. L., & Zacks, J. M. (2017). Event segmentation improves event memory up to one month later. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition , 43 (8), 1183 -1202. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000367 · DOI
  27. Frank, M. C., Fedorenko, E., Lai, P., Saxe, R., & Gibson, E. (2012). Verbal interference suppresses exact numerical representation. Cognitive Psychology , 64 (1 -2), 74 -92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2011.10.004 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2011.10.004 · DOI
  28. Gimenes, G., Pennequin, V., & Mercer, T. (2016). What is the best strategy for retaining gestures in working memory? Memory , 24 (6), 757 -765. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2015.1049544 https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2015.1049544 · DOI
  29. He, H., Li, J., Xiao, Q., Jiang, S., Yang, Y., & Zhi, S. (2019). Language and color perception: Evidence from Mongolian and Chinese speakers. Frontiers in Psychology , 10 , Article 551. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00551 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Hitch, G. J., Brandimonte, M. A., & Walker, P. (1995). Two types of representation in visual memory: Evidence from the effects of stimulus contrast on image combination. Memory & Cognition , 23 (2), 147 -154. https:// doi.org/10.3758/BF03197217 · DOI
  31. Imbo, I., & LeFevre, J.-A. (2010). The role of phonological and visual working memory in complex arithmetic for Chinese- and Canadian-educated adults. Memory & Cognition , 38 (2), 176 -185. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.38.2 .176 · DOI
  32. Jaroslawska, A. J., Gathercole, S. E., & Holmes, J. (2018). Following instructions in a dual-task paradigm: Evidence for a temporary motor store in working memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology , 71 (11), 2439 -2449. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747021817743492 · DOI
  33. Kurby, C. A., & Zacks, J. M. (2011). Age differences in the perception of hierarchical structure in events. Memory & Cognition , 39 (1), 75 -91. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-010-0027-2 · DOI
  34. Larsen, J. D., & Baddeley, A. (2003). Disruption of verbal STM by irrelevant speech, articulatory suppression, and manual tapping: Do they have a common source? The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A , 56 (8), 1249 -1268. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980244000765 · DOI
  35. Lidstone, J. S., Meins, E., & Fernyhough, C. (2010). The roles of private speech and inner speech in planning during middle childhood: Evidence from a dual task paradigm. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology , 107 (4), 438 -451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2010.06.002 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2010.06.002 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Logie, R. H., & Baddeley, A. D. (1987). Cognitive processes in counting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition , 13 (2), 310 -326. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.13.2.310 https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.13.2.310 · DOI
  37. Logie, R. H., Gilhooly, K. J., & Wynn, V. (1994). Counting on working memory in arithmetic problem solving. Memory & Cognition , 22 (4), 395 -410. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200866 · DOI
  38. Louwerse, M. M. (2011). Symbol interdependency in symbolic and embodied cognition. Topics in Cognitive Science , 3 (2), 273 -302. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2010.01106.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2010.01106.x · DOI · Paper page
  39. Lupyan, G. (2009). Extracommunicative functions of language: Verbal interference causes selective categorization impairments. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 16 (4), 711 -718. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.16.4.711 https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.16.4.711 · DOI · Paper page
  40. Lupyan, G. (2012). Linguistically modulated perception and cognition: The label-feedback hypothesis. Frontiers in Psychology , 3 , Article 54. https:// doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00054 · DOI
  41. Lupyan, G., & Ward, E. J. (2013). Language can boost otherwise unseen objects into visual awareness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 110 (35), 14196 -14201. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1303312110 · DOI
  42. Miles, C., Morgan, M. J., Milne, A. B., & Morris, E. D. M. (1996). Developmental and individual differences in visual memory span. Current Psychology: A Journal for Diverse Perspectives on Diverse Psychological Issues , 15 (1), 53 -67. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686934 · DOI
  43. Minda, J. P., Desroches, A. S., & Church, B. A. (2008). Learning ruledescribed and non-rule-described categories: A comparison of children and adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition , 34 (6), 1518 -1533. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013355 · DOI
  44. Mitsuhashi, S., Hirata, S., & Okuzumi, H. (2018). Role of inner speech on the Luria hand test. Cogent Psychology , 5 (1), Article 1449485. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/23311908.2018.1449485 · DOI · Paper page
  45. Morin, A. (2018). The self-re fl ective functions of inner speech: Thirteen years later. In P. Langland-Hassan & A. Vicente (Eds.), Inner speech: New voices (pp. 276 -298). Oxford University Press.
  46. Nakabayashi, K., & Burton, A. M. (2008). The role of verbal processing at different stages of recognition memory for faces. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology , 20 (3), 478 -496. https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440 801946174 · DOI
  47. Nedergaard, J., Wallentin, M., & Lupyan, G. (2023). Verbal interference paradigms: A systematic review investigating the role of language in cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 30 (2), 464 -488. https://doi.org/10 .3758/s13423-022-02144-7
  48. Newtson, D. (1976). Foundations of attribution: The perception of ongoing behavior. In J. H. Harvey, W. J. Ickes, & K. F. Kidd (Eds.), New directions in attribution research (pp. 223 -248). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  49. Papafragou, A., Hulbert, J., & Trueswell, J. (2008). Does language guide event perception? Evidence from eye movements. Cognition , 108 (1), 155 -184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.02.007 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.02.007 · DOI
  50. Papafragou, A., Massey, C., & Gleitman, L. (2002). Shake, rattle, ' n ' roll: The representation of motion in language and cognition. Cognition , 84 (2), 189 -219. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00046-X · DOI
  51. Peirce, J., Gray, J. R., Simpson, S., MacAskill, M., Höchenberger, R., Sogo, H., Kastman, E., & Lindeløv, J. K. (2019). Psychopy2: Experiments in behavior made easy. Behavior Research Methods , 51 (1), 195 -203. https:// doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-01193-y · DOI
  52. Pelizzon, L., Brandimonte, M. A., & Favretto, A. (1999). Imagery and recognition: Dissociable measures of memory? European Journal of Cognitive Psychology , 11 (3), 429 -443. https://doi.org/10.1080/713752323 · DOI
  53. Phillips, L. H., Wynn, V., Gilhooly, K. J., Della Sala, S., & Logie, R. H. (1999). The role of memory in the Tower of London task. Memory , 7 (2), 209 -231. https://doi.org/10.1080/741944066 · DOI
  54. Radvansky, G. A., & Zacks, J. M. (2014). Event cognition . Oxford University Press.
  55. Roberson, D., & Davidoff, J. (2000). The categorical perception of colors and facial expressions: The effect of verbal interference. Memory & Cognition , 28 (6), 977 -986. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209345 · DOI · Paper page
  56. Robert, N. D., & LeFevre, J.-A. (2013). Ending up with less: The role of working memory in solving simple subtraction problems with positive and negative answers. Research in Mathematics Education , 15 (2), 165 -176. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2013.797748 · DOI
  57. Rubin, D. C., & Umanath, S. (2015). Event memory: A theory of memory for laboratory, autobiographical, and fi ctional events. Psychological Review , 122 (1), 1 -23. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037907 · DOI · Paper page
  58. Saeki, E., & Saito, S. (2004). Effect of articulatory suppression on task-switching performance: Implications for models of working memory. Memory , 12 (3), 257 -271. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210244000649 · DOI
  59. Santin, M., Van Hout, A., & Flecken, M. (2021). Event endings in memory and language. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience , 36 (5), 625 -648. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2020.1868542 https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2020.1868542 · DOI
  60. Sargent, J. Q., Zacks, J. M., Hambrick, D. Z., Zacks, R. T., Kurby, C. A., Bailey, H. R., Eisenberg, M. L., & Beck, T. M. (2013). Event segmentation ability uniquely predicts event memory. Cognition , 129 (2), 241 -255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.07.002 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.07.002 · DOI · Paper page
  61. Schönbrodt, F. D., Wagenmakers, E.-J., Zehetleitner, M., & Perugini, M. (2017). Sequential hypothesis testing with Bayes factors: Ef fi ciently testing mean differences. Psychological Methods , 22 (2), 322 -339. https:// doi.org/10.1037/met0000061 · DOI
  62. Seitz, K., & Schumann-Hengsteler, R. (2002). Phonological loop and central executive processes in mental addition and multiplication. Psychologische Beiträge , 44 (2), 275 -302.
  63. Shebani, Z., & Pulvermüller, F. (2013). Moving the hands and feet speci fi cally impairs working memory for arm- and leg-related action words. Cortex , 49 (1), 222 -231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2011.10.005 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2011.10.005 · DOI
  64. Simmering, V. R., & Perone, S. (2013). Working memory capacity as a dynamic process. Frontiers in Psychology , 3 , Article 567. https:// doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00567 · DOI
  65. Skordos, D., Bunger, A., Richards, C., Selimis, S., Trueswell, J., & Papafragou, A. (2020). Motion verbs and memory for motion events. Cognitive Neuropsychology , 37 (5 -6), 254 -270. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 02643294.2019.1685480
  66. Smyth, M. M., & Pendleton, L. R. (1989). Working memory for movements. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A , 41 (2), 235 -250. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640748908402363 · DOI
  67. ter Bekke, M., Özyürek, A., & Ünal, E. (2022). Speaking but not gesturing predicts event memory: A cross-linguistic comparison. Language and Cognition , 14 (3), 362 -384. https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2022.3 · DOI
  68. Trbovich, P. L., & LeFevre, J.-A. (2003). Phonological and visual working memory in mental addition. Memory & Cognition , 31 (5), 738 -745. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196112 · DOI
  69. Trueswell, J. C., & Papafragou, A. (2010). Perceiving and remembering events cross-linguistically: Evidence from dual-task paradigms. Journal of Memory and Language , 63 (1), 64 -82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml .2010.02.006 · DOI
  70. van der Loo, M. (2014). The stringdist package for approximate string matching. The R Journal , 6 (1), 111 -122. https://doi.org/10.32614/RJ-2014-011 · DOI
  71. Vygotsky, L. B. (1986). Thought and language (A. Kozulin, Trans.; Rev. ed.). MIT Press. (Original work published 1934)
  72. Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2007). A practical solution to the pervasive problems of p values. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 14 (5), 779 -804. https://doi.org/ 10.3758/BF03194105 · DOI · Paper page
  73. Wallace, G. L., Peng, C. S., & Williams, D. (2017). Interfering with inner speech selectively disrupts problem solving and is linked with real-world executive functioning. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research , 60 (12), 3456 -3460. https://doi.org/10.1044/2017\_JSLHR-S-16-0376 · DOI
  74. Wilson, J. L., Scott, J. H., & Power, K. G. (1987). Developmental differences in the span of visual memory for pattern. British Journal of Developmental Psychology , 5 (3), 249 -255. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-835X.1987 .tb01060.x · DOI
  75. Winawer, J., Witthoft, N., Frank, M. C., Wu, L., Wade, A. R., & Boroditsky, L. (2007). Russian Blues reveal effects of language on color discrimination. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 104 (19), 7780 -7785. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0701644104 · DOI
  76. Wing fi eld, C., & Connell, L. (2022). Understanding the role of linguistic distributional knowledge in cognition. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience , 37 (10), 1220 -1270. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2022.2069278 https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2022.2069278 · DOI
  77. Zacks, J. M. (2020). Event perception and memory. Annual Review of Psychology , 71 (1), 165 -191. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-0104 19-051101 · DOI
  78. Zacks, J. M., Speer, N. K., Vettel, J. M., & Jacoby, L. L. (2006). Event understanding and memory in healthy aging and dementia of the Alzheimer type. Psychology and Aging , 21 (3), 466 -482. https://doi.org/10.1037/ 0882-7974.21.3.466
  79. Zacks, J. M., & Swallow, K. M. (2007). Event segmentation. Current Directions in Psychological Science , 16 (2), 80 -84. https://doi.org/10 .1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00480.x
  80. Zacks, J. M., & Tversky, B. (2001). Event structure in perception and conception. Psychological Bulletin , 127 (1), 3 -21. https://doi.org/10.1037/00332909.127.1.3 · DOI
  81. Zacks, J. M., Tversky, B., & Iyer, G. (2001). Perceiving, remembering, and communicating structure in events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 130 (1), 29 -58. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.130.1.29 https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.130.1.29 · DOI · Paper page
  82. Zeithamova, D., & Maddox, W. T. (2007). The role of visuospatial and verbal working memory in perceptual category learning. Memory & Cognition , 35 (6), 1380 -1398. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193609 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Banks, B., & Connell, L.
Affiliations
  • Lancaster University (GB)
  • National University of Ireland, Maynooth (IE)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition
Publisher
Center for Open Science
Published
2023-02-01
Volume
50
Issue
10
Pages
1592-1615
ISSN
0278-7393 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.31234/osf.io/64udy
OpenAlex
W4400103642
Cited by
5
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2
FWCI
1.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Maynooth University ePrints and eTheses Archive (Maynooth University) (submittedVersion)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Irish Research eLibrary
  • European Commission
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
internal language, event memory, event segmentation, memory encoding, dual-task interference, nonverbal memory
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Female, Humans, Language, Male, Mental Recall, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review