In defence of high-speed memory scanning.
This paper reviews some of the evidence that bears on the existence of a mental high-speed serial exhaustive scanning process (SES) used by humans to interrogate the active memory of a set of items to determine whether it contains a test item. First proposed in the 1960s, based on patterns of reacti...
| Publicado en: | Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Vol. 69; no. 10; pp. 2020 - 2076 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Sage Publications Inc.
Oct2016
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=117671725&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 117671725 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 17470218 1US5 jtl: Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology issn: 17470218 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Oct2016 vid: 69 iid: 10 pid: 344 pub: Sage Publications Inc. artinfo: ui: 117671725 10.1080/17470218.2016.1198820 ppf: 2020 ppct: 56 formats: tig: atl: In defence of high-speed memory scanning. aug: au: Sternberg, Saul affil: Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA su: Memory Scanning systems Reaction time Brain function localization Forensic accounting sug: subj: Memory Scanning systems Reaction time Brain function localization Forensic accounting keyword: Memory scanning Memory search Sternberg paradigm Sternberg task Working memory Memory scanning Memory search Sternberg paradigm Sternberg task Working memory ab: This paper reviews some of the evidence that bears on the existence of a mental high-speed serial exhaustive scanning process (SES) used by humans to interrogate the active memory of a set of items to determine whether it contains a test item. First proposed in the 1960s, based on patterns of reaction times (RTs), numerous later studies supported, elaborated, extended, and limited the generality of SES, while critics claimed that SES never occurred, that predictions from SES were violated, and that other mechanisms produced the RT patterns that led to the idea. I show that some of these claims result from ignoring variations in experimental procedure that produce superficially similar but quantitatively different RT patterns and that, for the original procedures, the most frequently repeated claims that predictions are violated are false. I also discuss evidence against the generality of competing theories of active-memory interrogation, especially those that depend on discrimination of directly accessible “memory-strength”. Some of this evidence has been available since the 1960s but has been ignored by some proponents of alternative theories. Other evidence presented herein is derived from results of one relevant experiment described for the first time, results of another described in more detail than heretofore, and new analyses of old data. Knowledge of brain function acquired during the past half century has increased the plausibility of SES. The conclusion: SES is alive and well, but many associated puzzles merit further investigation, suggestions for which are offered. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|