Further differentiating item and order information in semantic memory: students’ recall of words from the “CU Fight Song”, Harry Potter book titles, and Scooby Doo theme song
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
University of Colorado (CU) students were tested for both order and item information in their semantic memory for the "CU Fight Song". Following an earlier study by Overstreet and Healy [(2011). Item and order information in semantic memory: Students' retention of the "CU fight song" lyrics. Memory & Cognition, 39, 251-259. doi: 10.3758/s13421-010-0018-3 ], a symmetrical bow-shaped serial position function (with both primacy and recency advantages) was found for reconstructing the order of the nine lines in the song, whereas a function with no primacy advantage was found for recalling a missing word from each line. This difference between order and item information was found even though students filled in missing words without any alternatives provided and missing words came from the beginning, middle, or end of each line. Similar results were found for CU students' recall of the sequence of Harry Potter book titles and the lyrics of the Scooby Doo theme song. These findings strengthen the claim that the pronounced serial position function in semantic memory occurs largely because of the retention of order, rather than item, 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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