Biomedical subjects

G M Pelamatti

Publications and source records attributed to G M Pelamatti.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed1990

Is there a modality effect? Evidence for visual recency and suffix effects.

In Experiment 1, four groups of 16 subjects performed ordered recall of six-syllable lists in both suffix and nonsuffix conditions. Sequential presentation of the lists varied for each group. In the auditory presentation, the syllables were delivered from one location only and were read aloud by the subjects. For the visual, spatially nondistributed presentation, the syllables appeared in one location only and were read silently. For visual, spatially distributed presentations, the syllables were spread out either vertically or horizontally and were read silently. Very robust recency and suffix effects were found in the auditory presentation, as well as in visual, spatially distributed presentations. In Experiment 2, 16 subjects performed ordered recall of visually presented lists with the items spread out vertically and conflicting spatial and temporal orders. A reliable recency effect was found for the final block of trials. In Experiment 3, 16 subjects performed ordered recall in the same conditions as in Experiment 2, except that they were instructed to recall the temporal order in which the spatial positions would be filled in. A bow-shaped curve and a strong recency effect were obtained.

Adult↗

PubMed1989

Multiple mechanisms for recency with vowels and consonants.

Three experiments were conducted to test the hypothesis that the difference in recency effect between vowel-contrasting and stop-contrasting lists of syllables in immediate ordered recall can be explained by item discriminability and regular short-term memory mechanisms, without any recourse to echoic memory or precategorical acoustic storage (PAS). In Experiment 1, the short-term memory mechanisms were manipulated by reducing amount of output interference and length of retention interval. The partial-report technique was used. The most important finding was the usual final-position recency effect (difference in recall between the fifth and sixth serial positions) for the vowel lists but not for the stop lists, regardless of the type of report. Thus the PAS theory could not be rejected. In Experiments 2 and 3, the last item was differentiated from the other items of the list, either by lengthening the interstimulus interval between the last and the next-to-last (Experiment 2) or by increasing the intensity of the last item (Experiment 3). In both cases, an increase of the final-position recency effect was found even for stop lists. Since a drop in recall errors was also obtained for the fourth item when its intensity was increased (von Restorff effect), this final-position recency effect for stop lists is likely to be due to item discriminability, and not to echoic memory for the last item. Item discriminability appeared to be the critical factor.

Discrimination, Psychological↗

PubMed1983

Effects of phonetic similarity and order of report on the right ear advantage.

Two experiments are reported which were aimed at testing the effect of phonetic similarity and order of report on the right ear advantage in consonant-vowel dichotic tasks. The stimuli were consonant-vowel syllables which comprised the six stop consonants: /ba/, /da/, /ga/, /pa/, /ta/ and /ka/. In Experiment 1 the syllables were contrasted on place of articulation (condition 1) or on voicing (condition 2). In Experiment 2 the stimuli were contrasted either on one feature (place or voicing) or on both features (place and voicing). The results showed that the right ear advantage did not depend on phonetic similarity, whereas it depended on the order of report, being stronger when the perceptual channel was considered.

Adult↗