Abstract
Considerable evidence has indicated that some acoustical properties of spoken items are preserved in an “echoic” memory for approximately 2 sec. However, some of this evidence has also shown that changing the voice speaking the stimulus items has a disruptive effect on memory which persists longer than that of other acoustical variables. The present experiment examined the effect of voice changes on response bias as well as on accuracy in a recognition memory task. The task involved judging recognition probes as being present in or absent from sets of dichotically presented digits. Recognition of probes spoken in the same voice as that of the dichotic items was more accurate than recognition of different-voice probes at each of three retention intervals of up to 4 sec. Different-voice probes increased the likelihood of “absent” responses, but only up to a 1.4-sec delay. These shifts in response bias may represent a property of echoic memory which should be investigated further.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Reference Note
Crowder, R.Audition and speech coding in short-term memory. Paper presented at the Seventh International Symposium on Attention and Performance, Senanque, France, 1976.
References
Cole, R., Coltheart, M., &Allard, F. Memory of a speaker’s voice: RT to same- or different-voiced letters.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1974.26, 1–7.
Cole, R., &Scott, B. Distinctive feature control of decision time: Same-different judgments of simultaneously heard phonemes.Perception & Psychophysics, 1972,12, 91–94.
Conrad, R. Interference or decay over short retention intervals?Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1967,6, 49–54.
Craik, F., &Kirsner, K. The effect of speaker’s voice on word recognition.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1974,26, 274–284.
Crowder, R. Waiting for the stimulus suffix: Decay, delay, rhythm and readout in immediate memory.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1971,23, 324–340.
Crowder, R., &Morton, J. Precategorical acoustic storage (PAS).Perception & Psychophysics, 1969,5, 365–373.
Emmerich, D., Gray, J., Watson, C., &Tanis, D. Response latency, confidence, and ROCs in auditory signal detection.Perception & Psychophysics, 1972,11, 65–72.
Lindley, R., &Brown, D. Acoustic and associative coding in short-term memory.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1971,23, 14–21.
Massaro, D. Preperceptual auditory images.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970,85, 411–417.
McNicol, D.A primer of signal detection theory. London: Allen & Unwin, 1972.
Neisser, U.Cognitive psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1967.
Parks, T. Signal-detectability theory of recognition memory performance.Psychological Review, 1966,73, 44–58.
Posner, M. Abstraction and the process of recognition. In G. Bower & J. Spence (Eds.),The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 3). New York: Academic Press, 1969.
Springer, S. Memory for linguistic and nonlinguistic dimensions of the same acoustic stimulus.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1973,101, 159–163.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Madden, D.J., Bastian, J. Probing echoic memory with different voices. Memory & Cognition 5, 331–334 (1977). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197579
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197579