Can the effects of temporal grouping explain the similarities and differences between free recall and serial recall?

Temporal grouping can provide a principled explanation for changes in the serial position curves and output orders that occur with increasing list length in immediate free recall (IFR) and immediate serial recall (ISR). To test these claims, we examined the effects of temporal grouping on the order of recall in IFR and ISR of lists of between one and 12 words. Consistent with prior research, there were significant effects of temporal grouping in the ISR task with mid-length lists using serial recall scoring, and no overall grouping advantage in the IFR task with longer list lengths using free recall scoring.

Why do participants initiate free recall of short lists of words with the first list item? Toward a general episodic memory explanation.

Participants who are presented with a short list of words for immediate free recall (IFR) show a strong tendency to initiate their recall with the 1st list item and then proceed in forward serial order. We report 2 experiments that examined whether this tendency was underpinned by a short-term memory store, of the type that is argued by some to underpin recency effects in IFR. In Experiment 1, we presented 3 groups of participants with lists of between 2 and 12 words for IFR, delayed free recall, and continuous-distractor free recall.

Examining the relationship between immediate serial recall and immediate free recall: common effects of phonological loop variables but only limited evidence for the phonological loop.

We examined the contribution of the phonological loop to immediate free recall (IFR) and immediate serial recall (ISR) of lists of between one and 15 words. Following Baddeley (1986, 2000, 2007, 2012), we assumed that visual words could be recoded into the phonological store when presented silently but that recoding would be prevented by concurrent articulation (CA; Experiment 1). We further assumed that the use of the phonological loop would be evidenced by greater serial recall for lists of phonologically dissimilar words relative to lists of phonologically similar words (Experiments 2A and 2B).