Abstract
This experiment investigates the possibility that two different kinds of imagery codes are used in sentence memory, one involving moving images (kinetic imagery) and the other involving stationary images (static imagery). Using a modality-specific interference task it was shown that only sentences involving kinetic imagery were affected by the visual interference task; neither static nor low imagery sentences were so affected. The results are interpreted as showing that some kind of imaginal code is used in memory, but that there are different kinds of code available. It is claimed that this result is inconsistent both with Paivio's (1971) ‘dual-coding’ hypothesis and with propositional accounts of sentence memory.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
