Some Tests of the Decay Theory of Immediate Memory

1958 Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 1,433 citations

Abstract

The hypothesis of decay of the memory trace as a cause of forgetting has been unpopular. The reasons for this unpopularity are criticized and a theory of the memory span, based on this hypothesis, is put forward. Three experiments which test the hypothesis are described. In each, two kinds of stimuli are presented to the subject, viz., “required” stimuli, which he attempts to remember, and “additional” stimuli, to which he merely makes responses. The first experiment will show that even when the number of required stimuli is well below the memory span, forgetting occurs if the presentation of additional stimuli delays recall for several seconds. The second shows that the effect of the additional stimuli depends only slightly on their similarity to the required stimuli: it also shows that their effect is negligible when they precede, instead of follow, the required stimuli. The third shows that the effect of additional stimuli interpolated before recall remains considerable even when there is an interval of several seconds between presentation of required and additional stimuli.

Keywords

ForgettingRecallPsychologyEngramCognitive psychologySubliminal stimuli

Affiliated Institutions

Related Publications

ACOUSTIC CONFUSIONS IN IMMEDIATE MEMORY

Sequences of 6 letters of the alphabet were visually presented for immediate recall to 387 subjects. Errors showed a systematic relationship to original stimuli. This is held to...

1964 British Journal of Psychology 1402 citations

Publication Info

Year
1958
Type
article
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
12-21
Citations
1433
Access
Closed

Social Impact

Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions

Citation Metrics

1433
OpenAlex
84
Influential
848
CrossRef

Cite This

John L. Brown (1958). Some Tests of the Decay Theory of Immediate Memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology , 10 (1) , 12-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470215808416249

Identifiers

DOI
10.1080/17470215808416249

Data Quality

Data completeness: 77%