Memory & Cognition

, Volume 4, Issue 1, pp 96–102 | Cite as

Generative processes in character classification: Evidence for a probe encoding set

  • John G. Seamon
  • Charles E. Wright


The role of rehearsal in a varied set memory scanning task was investigated by asking the subjects to rehearse subvocally the one to four target characters cyclically at a self-paced rate until the probe was presented. After making a manual positive or negative response to the probe, the subjects reported the last item rehearsed before the probe was presented. The results indicate that, when the last rehearsed item matched the probe, RTs were significantly faster than when it differed. Mean RTs over target set size were generally well fit by linearly increasing RT functions, with comparable slope values for negative responses and positive responses when the last rehearsal was the same as or different from the probe. The data suggest that rehearsal may reduce the duration of the probe encoding stage through some mechanism of pathway activation by providing the subject with a generated representation of what may appear next as a probe.


Serial Position Negative Response Target Size Target Character Memory Scanning 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References Notes

  1. 1.
    Cavanagh, P. Differential effects of rehearsal strategy on negative and positive slopes in item recognition. Paper presented at the annual meeting, Psychonomic Society, Boston, November 1974.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Seamon, J. G. Memory scanning through word and nonword letter strings. Paper presented at the annual convention, American Psychological Association, New Orleans, August 1974.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sternberg, S. Evidence against self-terminating memory search from properties of RT distributions. Paper presented at the annual meeting, Psychonomic Society, St. Louis, November 1973.Google Scholar


  1. Atkinson, R. C., Herrmann, D. J., &Wescourt, K. T. Search processes in recognition memory. In R. L. Solso (Ed.),Theories in cognitive psychology. Washington, D. C: Winston, 1974.Google Scholar
  2. Baddeley, A. D., &Ecob, J. R. Reaction time and short-term memory: Implications of repetition effects for the high-speed exhaustive scan hypothesis.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1973,25, 229–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bertelson, P. Sequential redundancy and speed in a serial two-choice responding task.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1961,12, 90–102.Google Scholar
  4. Corballis, M. C., Kirby, J., &Miller, A. Access to elements of a memorized list.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1972,94, 185–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Eichelman, W. H. Stimulus and response repetition effects for naming letters at two response-stimulus intervals.Perception & Psychophysics, 1970,7, 94–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Forrin, B., &Morin, R. E. Recognition times for items in short- and long-term memory. In W. G. Koster (Ed.),Attention and performance II. Amsterdam: North Holland, 1969. Pp. 126–141.Google Scholar
  7. Hacker, M. J., &Hinrichs, J. V. Multiple predictions in choice reaction time: A serial memory scanning interpretation.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1974,103, 999–1005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hinrchs, J. V., &Krainz, P. L.Expectancy in choice reaction time: Anticipation of stimulus or response?Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970,85, 330–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Keele, S. W. Repetition effect: A memory-dependent process.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969,80, 243–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Keele, S. W.Attention and human performancev. Pacific Palisades, Calif: Goodyear. 1973.Google Scholar
  11. Klatzky, R. L., Juola, J. F., &Atkinson, R. C. Test stimulus representation and experimental context effects in memory scanning.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1971,87. 281–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Klatzky, R. L., &Smith, E. E. Stimulus expectancy and retrieval from short-term memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1972,94, 101–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Meyer, D. E., Schvaneveldt, R. W., &Ruddy, M. G. Loci of contextual effects in visual word recognition. In P. Rabbitt (Ed.),Attention and performance V. New York: Academic Press, 1974.Google Scholar
  14. Nickerson, R. S. Binary-classification reaction time: A review of some studies of human information-processing capabilities.Psychonomic Monograph Supplements, 1972,4, no. 17(Whole No. 65).Google Scholar
  15. Posner, M. I., &Boies, S. J. Components of attention.Psychological Review, 1971,78, 391–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Posner, M. I., Boies, S. J., Eichelman, W. H., & Taylor, R. L. Retention of visual and name codes of single letters.Journal of Experimental Psychology Monograph, 1969,79, No. 1, Part 2.Google Scholar
  17. Posner, M. I., Klein, R., Summers, J., &Buggie, S. On the selection of signals.Memory & Cognition, 1973,1, 2–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Seamon, J. G. Retrieval processes for organized long-term storage.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1973,97, 170–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Selfridge, O. G., &Neisser, U. Pattern recognition by machine.Scientific American, 1960,203, 60–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Shiffrin, R. M., &Schneider, W. An expectancy model for memory search.Memory & Cognition, 1974,2, 616–628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sternberg, S. Memory-scanning: Mental processes revealed by reaction-time experiments.American Scientist, 1969,57, 421–457.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Tversky, B. Pictorial and verbal encoding in a short-term memory task.Perception & Psychophysics, 1969,6, 225–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • John G. Seamon
    • 1
  • Charles E. Wright
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyWesleyan UniversityMiddletown

Personalised recommendations