Eye Movements and Serial Memory for Visual-Spatial Information
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research investigated the nature of encoding and its contribution to serial recall for visual-spatial information. In order to do so, we examined the relationship between fixation duration and recall performance. Using the dot task--a series of seven dots spatially distributed on a monitor screen is presented sequentially for immediate recall--performance and eye-tracking data were recorded during the presentation of the to-be-remembered items. When participants were free to move their eyes at their will, both fixation durations and probability of correct recall decreased as a function of serial position. Furthermore, imposing constant durations of fixation across all serial positions had a beneficial impact (though relatively small) on item but not order recall. Great care was taken to isolate the effect of fixation duration from that of presentation duration. Although eye movement at encoding contributes to immediate memory, it is not decisive in shaping serial recall performance. Our results also provide further evidence that the distinction between item and order information, well-established in the verbal domain, extends to visual-spatial information.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it