There is no capacity limited buffer in the Murdock (1962) free recall data.

Theories of short term memory often include a limited capacity "buffer". Such a buffer contains items which do not decay at all but are overwritten by new data. I show that one of the experiments that fueled the buffer concept, the free recall experiments by Murdock (J Exp Psychol 64(5):482-488, 1962), does not contain such a buffer.

Short term memory bowing effect is consistent with presentation rate dependent decay.

I reanalyze the free recall data of Murdock, J Exp Psychol 64(5):482-488 (1962) and Murdock and Okada, J Verbal Learn and Verbal Behav 86:263-267 (1970) which show the famous bowing effect in which initial and recent items are recalled better than intermediate items (primacy and recency effects). Recent item recall probabilities follow a logarithmic decay with time of recall consistent with the tagging/retagging theory. The slope of the decay increases with increasing presentation rate.

Short term memory may be the depletion of the readily releasable pool of presynaptic neurotransmitter vesicles of a metastable long term memory trace pattern.

The Tagging/Retagging model of short term memory was introduced earlier (Tarnow in Cogn Neurodyn 2(4):347-353, 2008) to explain the linear relationship between response time and correct response probability for word recall and recognition: At the initial stimulus presentation the words displayed tag the corresponding long term memory locations. The tagging process is linear in time and takes about one second to reach a tagging level of 100%. After stimulus presentation the tagging level decays logarithmically with time to 50% after 14 s and to 20% after 220 s.

Response probability and response time: a straight line, the Tagging/Retagging interpretation of short term memory, an operational definition of meaningfulness and short term memory time decay and search time.

The functional relationship between correct response probability and response time is investigated in data sets from Rubin, Hinton and Wenzel, J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 25:1161-1176, 1999 and Anderson, J Exp Psychol [Hum Learn] 7:326-343, 1981. The two measures are linearly related through stimulus presentation lags from 0 to 594 s in the former experiment and for repeated learning of words in the latter. The Tagging/Retagging interpretation of short term memory is introduced to explain this linear relationship.

Proactive interference, retroactive interference--what about self-interference? A new interpretation of the recency-primacy shift.

The recency-primacy shift (RPS) indicates that memory for early list items improves and memory for later items becomes worse as the retention interval between study and test increases. In this contribution, this puzzling experimental finding--memory improving with time--is found to be consistent with a model in which recognition is temporarily interfered with by its own storage process (self-interference). I show that this interpretation can qualitatively better account for the RPS experimental data than can the dimensional distinctiveness model, the only other outstanding explanation of the RPS.