Additional evidence that valence does not affect serial recall.

Dominic Guitard, Ian Neath, Jean Saint-Aubin
Author Information
  1. Dominic Guitard: École de psychologie, Université de Moncton, Moncton, New Brunswick, Canada. ORCID
  2. Ian Neath: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA.
  3. Jean Saint-Aubin: École de psychologie, Université de Moncton, Moncton, New Brunswick, Canada. ORCID

Abstract

In immediate serial recall, a canonical short-term memory task, it is well established that performance is affected by several sublexical, lexical, and semantic factors. One factor that receives a growing interest is valence, whether a word is categorised as positive (e.g., happy) or as negative (e.g., pain). However, contradictory findings have recently emerged. Tse and Altarriba in two experiments with one set of stimuli and fixed lists concluded that valence affects serial recall performance, while Bireta et al. in three experiments with three sets of stimuli and randomised lists concluded that valence does not affect serial recall performance. Two experiments assessed the experimental discrepancy between Tse and Altarriba and Bireta et al. For both experiments, in one block, every participant saw the exact same lists as those used in Tse and Altarriba, and in the other block, each list was randomly constructed for each participant, as was done in Bireta et al. In Experiment 1, with concrete words varying in valence, we replicated the results of Tse and Altarriba with fixed lists and the results of Bireta et al. with randomised lists. In Experiment 2, with abstract words with both fixed and randomised lists, we replicate the absence of effect valence like Tse and Altarriba and Bireta et al. Overall, we conclude that valence does not affect serial recall and the discrepancy was attributed to the peculiarity of the fixed lists used by Tse and Altarriba.

Keywords

References

  1. Behav Res Methods. 2009 Nov;41(4):977-90 [PMID: 19897807]
  2. Behav Res Methods. 2013 Dec;45(4):1191-207 [PMID: 23404613]
  3. Can J Exp Psychol. 2022 Jun;76(2):99-110 [PMID: 35201797]
  4. Behav Res Methods. 2010 Nov;42(4):1096-104 [PMID: 21139177]
  5. Br J Psychol. 2022 Aug;113(3):820-834 [PMID: 35396713]
  6. Can J Exp Psychol. 2021 Mar;75(1):35-47 [PMID: 33856824]
  7. Mem Cognit. 2009 Sep;37(6):850-65 [PMID: 19679864]
  8. Mem Cognit. 2020 May;48(4):683-690 [PMID: 31907863]
  9. Psychon Bull Rev. 2009 Apr;16(2):225-37 [PMID: 19293088]
  10. Psychon Bull Rev. 2018 Jun;25(3):870-891 [PMID: 28695528]
  11. Can J Exp Psychol. 2022 Jun;76(2):111-121 [PMID: 35286110]

MeSH Term

Humans
Happiness
Memory, Short-Term
Mental Recall
Pain
Semantics
Serial Learning

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0valencelistsserialrecallTseAltarribaBiretaetalexperimentsfixedperformancerandomisedaffectshort-termmemoryegonestimuliconcludedthreediscrepancyblockparticipantusedExperimentwordsresultsimmediatecanonicaltaskwellestablishedaffectedseveralsublexicallexicalsemanticfactorsOnefactorreceivesgrowinginterestwhetherwordcategorisedpositivehappynegativepainHowevercontradictoryfindingsrecentlyemergedtwosetaffectssetsTwoassessedexperimentaleverysawexactlistrandomlyconstructeddone1concretevaryingreplicated2abstractreplicateabsenceeffectlikeOverallconcludeattributedpeculiarityAdditionalevidenceValence

Similar Articles

Cited By

No available data.