Backward recall and benchmark effects of working memory
Open accessAbstract
Working memory was designed to explain four benchmark memory effects: the word length effect, the irrelevant speech effect, the acoustic confusion effect, and the concurrent articulation effect. However, almost all research thus far has used tests that emphasize forward recall. In four experiments, we examine whether each effect is observable when the items are recalled in reverse order. Subjects did not know which recall direction would be required until the time of test, ensuring that encoding processes would be identical for both recall directions. Contrary to predictions of both the primacy model and the feature model, the benchmark memory effect was either absent or greatly attenuated with backward recall, despite being present with forward recall. Direction of recall had no effect on the more difficult conditions (e.g., long words, similar-sounding items, items presented with irrelevant speech, and items studied with concurrent articulation). Several factors not considered by the primacy and feature models are noted, and a possible explanation within the framework of the SIMPLE model is briefly presented.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Our findings mirror a well-studied effect in humans, wherein recall is harder in the backward direction than in the forward direction.
“Indeed, our findings mirror a well-studied effect in humans, wherein recall is harder in the backward direction than in the forward direction (Clair-Thompson & Allen, 2013;Thomas et al., 2003;Bireta et al., 2010;Li & Lewandowsky, 1995;Guitard et al., 2019).”
From The Reversal Curse: LLMs trained on "A is B" fail to learn "B is A" (2023) · cites this paper as Bireta et al., 2010
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
A temporal ratio model of memory
Brown, G. D. A., Neath, I., & Chater, N. (2007) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.114.3.539 · Cited by 798 · see citing works
Self-citationResponse selection involves executive control: evidence from the selective interference paradigm
Szmalec, A., Vandierendonck, A., & Kemps, E. (2005) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/bf03193069 · Cited by 69 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 38
- Anderson, J. R., Bothell, D., Lebiere, C., & Matessa, M. (1998). An integrated theory of list memory. Journal of Memory & Language, 38, 341-380.
- Avons, S. E., Wright, K. L., & Pammer, K. (1994). The word-length effect in probed and serial recall. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47A, 207-231.
- Li, S.-C., & Lewandowsky, S. (1995). Forward and backward recall: Different retrieval processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 837-847.
- Murray, D. J. (1968). Articulation and acoustic confusability in short- term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 78, 679-684.
- Nairne, J. S., Neath, I., & Serra, M. (1997). Proactive interference plays a role in the word-length effect. Psychonomic Bulletin & Re- view, 4, 541-545.
- Neath, I. (2000). Modeling the effects of irrelevant speech on memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 403-423.
- Neath, I., Bireta, T. J., & Surprenant, A. M. (2003). The time-based word length effect and stimulus set specificity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 430-434.
- Neath, I., & Brown, G. D. A. (2006). SIMPLE: Further applications of a local distinctiveness model of memory. In B. H. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 201-243). San Diego: Academic Press.
- Neath, I., Farley, L. A., & Surprenant, A. M. (2003). Directly as- sessing the relationship between irrelevant speech and articulatory suppression. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56A, 1269-1278.
- Neath, I., Guérard, K., Jalbert, A., Bireta, T. J., & Surprenant, A. M. (2009). Irrelevant speech effects and statistical learning. Quar- terly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1551-1559.
- Neath, I., & Nairne, J. S. (1995). Word-length effects in immediate memory: Overwriting trace decay theory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 429-441.
- Neath, I., & Surprenant, A. M. (2003). Human memory (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
- Page, M. P. A., & Norris, D. [G.] (1998). The primacy model: A new model of immediate serial recall. Psychological Review, 105, 761-781.
- Page, M. P. A., & Norris, D. G. (2003). The irrelevant sound effect: What needs modelling, and a tentative model. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56A, 1289-1300.
- Surprenant, A. M., Neath, I., & Brown, G. D. A. (2006). Modeling age-related differences in immediate memory using SIMPLE. Journal of Memory & Language, 55, 572-586.
- Tehan, G., & Mills, K. (2007). Working memory and short-term mem- ory storage: What does backward recall tell us? In N. Osaka, R. Logie, & M. D'Esposito (Eds.), The cognitive neuroscience of working mem- ory (pp. 153-163). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Tehan, G., & Tolan, G. A. (2007). Word length effects in long-term memory. Journal of Memory & Language, 56, 35-48.
- Thorndike, E. L., & Lorge, I. (1944). The teacher's word book of 30,000 words. New York: Columbia University, Teachers College Press.
- Walker, I., & Hulme, C. (1999). Concrete words are easier to recall than abstract words: Evidence for a semantic contribution to short- term serial recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 25, 1256-1271.
- Bart lett lecture. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 44A, 1-31.
- Baddeley, A. [D.], Chincotta, D., Stafford, L., & Turk, D. (2002). Is the word length effect in STM entirely attributable to output delay? Evidence from serial recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55A, 353-369.
- Baddeley, A. D., Thomson, N., & Buchanan, M. (1975). Word length and the structure of short-term memory. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 14, 575-589.
- Brown, G. D. A., Preece, T., & Hulme, C. (2000). Oscillator-based memory for serial order. Psychological Review, 107, 127-181.
- Colle, H. A., & Welsh, A. (1976). Acoustic masking in primary mem- ory. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 15, 17-31.
- Coltheart, M. (1981). The MRC psycholinguistic database. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33A, 497-505.
- Conrad, R. (1964). Acoustic confusions in immediate memory. British Journal of Psychology, 55, 75-84.
- Cowan, N., Day, L. J., Saults, J. S., Keller, T. A., Johnson, T., & Flores, L. (1992). The role of verbal output time in the effects of word length on immediate memory. Journal of Memory & Language, 31, 1-17.
- Cowan, N., Nugent, L. D., Elliott, E. M., & Geer, T. (2000). Is there a temporal basis of the word length effect? A response to Service (1998). Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53A, 647-660.
- Farrand, P., & Jones, D. (1996). Direction of report in spatial and verbal serial short term memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A, 140-158.
- Hulme, C., Neath, I., Stuart, G., Shostak, L., Surprenant, A. M., & Brown, G. D. A. (2006). The distinctiveness of the word-length effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 32, 586-594.
- Hulme, C., Roodenrys, S., Schweickert, R., Brown, G. D. A., Mar- tin, S., & Stuart, G. (1997). Word-frequency effects on short-term memory tasks: Evidence for a redintegration process in immediate serial recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 23, 1217-1232.
- Hulme, C., Surprenant, A. M., Bireta, T. J., Stuart, G., & Neath, I. (2004). Abolishing the word-length effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 30, 98-106.
- Ku era, H., & Francis, W. N. (1967). Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.
- 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). San Diego: Elsevier.
- Lewandowsky, S., & Murdock, B. B., Jr. (1989). Memory for serial order. Psychological Review, 96, 25-57.
- Lewandowsky, S., Nimmo, S., & Brown, G. D. A. (2008). When tem- poral isolation benefits memory for serial order. Journal of Memory & Language, 58, 415-428.
- Li, S.-C., & Lewandowsky, S. (1993). Intralist distractors and recall direction: Constraints on models of memory for serial order. Journal volving serial position. Supplemental data showing recall as a function of serial position for all experiments are available from I.N. or at http:// memory.psych.mun.ca/pubs/reports.shtml.
- Watkins, M. J., Watkins, O. C., & Crowder, R. G. (1974). The modal- ity effect in free and serial recall as a function of phonological similar- ity. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 13, 430-447. NOTES
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Reversal Curse: LLMs trained on "A is B" fail to learn "B is A"
Berglund, L., Tong, M., Kaufmann, M., Balesni, M., Stickland, A. C., Korbak, T., & Evans, O. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2309.12288 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
“Indeed, our findings mirror a well-studied effect in humans, wherein recall is harder in the backward direction than in the forward direction (Clair-Thompson & Allen, 2013; Thomas et al., 2003; Bireta et al., 2010; Li & Lewandowsky, 1995; Guitard et al., 2019).”
Background
- Authors
- Bireta, T. J., Fry, S. E., Jalbert, A., Neath, I., Surprenant, A. M., Tehan, G., & Tolan, G. A.
- Affiliations
- The College of New Jersey (US)
- Memorial University of Newfoundland (CA)
- University of Southern Queensland (AU)
- Australian Catholic University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Bireta, T. J.
- Neath, I.
- Surprenant, A. M.
- Tehan, G.
- Venue
- Memory & Cognition
- Published
- 2010-03-16
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 279-291
- ISSN
- 0090-502X (ISSN-L)
- 1532-5946
- OpenAlex
- W2146883592
- Cited by
- 45
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 2.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Memory & Cognition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- University of Southern Queensland ePrints (University of Southern Queensland) (acceptedVersion)
- Research Bank (Australian Catholic University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Keywords
- working memory, backward recall, primacy effect, feature models, simple model, word length effect, irrelevant speech effect, serial order
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Memory, Short-Term, Speech, Benchmarking
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