Effects of divided attention on free and cued recall of verbal events and action events

BÄckman, Lars; Nilsson, Lars-GÖran · 1991 · Crossref

DOI: 10.3758/bf03334767

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates the cognitive mechanisms underlying the encoding of subject-performed tasks (SPTs) versus verbally presented sentences, specifically examining how divided attention affects memory for both types of material. The research addresses a theoretical debate regarding whether SPT encoding is automatic and nonstrategic, as previously suggested by Cohen, or effortful and strategic, as argued by Backman and Nilsson. By manipulating attentional demands and retrieval conditions, the authors aimed to determine if the superior recall of SPTs stems from automatic encoding processes or from strategic organization that can be disrupted by concurrent tasks. The experiment employed a 2 (material: SPTs vs. sentences) x 2 (encoding condition: focused attention vs. divided attention) factorial design with 64 university students. Participants memorized a list of 25 organizable items, categorized into five taxonomic groups (e.g., clothing, tools). In the SPT condition, subjects physically performed actions described by imperative sentences; in the sentence condition, they read and heard the same imperatives. During the divided attention condition, participants simultaneously performed a backward counting task to consume attentional resources. Memory was assessed via immediate free recall followed by cued recall, where taxonomic category names were provided as retrieval cues. Results demonstrated that SPTs were recalled significantly better than sentences across all conditions. Both free and cued recall performance deteriorated under divided attention, with the decline being more pronounced for sentences than for SPTs. Crucially, the beneficial effect of taxonomic cues was equal for both SPTs and sentences, regardless of the encoding condition. Statistical analysis revealed significant main effects for material, encoding condition, and test type, along with a significant interaction between material and encoding condition, confirming that sentences suffered greater impairment under dual-task demands. There were no significant interactions involving the test factor, indicating that cues did not differentially rescue memory for SPTs compared to sentences. The findings support the hypothesis that SPT encoding involves effortful, strategic components rather than purely automatic processes. The deterioration of SPT recall under divided attention indicates that the encoding of action events requires attentional resources. The equal benefit from cues suggests that the superior recall of SPTs is not due to a qualitative difference in how retrieval cues activate memory traces, but rather reflects the richer, multimodal nature of SPT encoding which facilitates organization. The study concludes that while SPTs are more resistant to the detrimental effects of divided attention than verbal sentences, they are still subject to attentional constraints, challenging the view that SPT memory is independent of strategic encoding operations.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-25; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• prospective memory interruptions