Figure 1.
Melodies used in Experiment 1.
A schematic representation of the two types of melodies used in Experiment 1 plotted against time in seconds. Every tone is represented by a rectangle. The length of the tone is indicated by the width of the rectangle, the base frequency by its vertical position. The total number of tones per sequence is identical in both conditions.
Figure 2.
Serial position data for Experiment 1.
Recall performance as a function of auditory distractor condition (quiet, changing state ending, steady state ending) for each serial position (left panel) and averaged across positions (right panel) in Experiment 1. The error bars depict the standard errors of the means.
Figure 3.
Across-trial performance for Experiment 1.
Recall performance as a function of the auditory distractor condition (quiet, changing state ending, steady state ending) and the ordinal position of a trial within a condition in Experiment 1.
Figure 4.
Sentences used in Experiment 2.
A schematic representation of the two types of sentences used in Experiment 2. The translations read “Tuesday mostly sunny with scattered showers. It blows a weak to moderate northeasterly wind.” and “Tuesday mostly sunny with scattered showers. It blows blows blows blows blows blows.”, respectively.
Figure 5.
Serial position data for Experiment 2.
Recall performance as a function of auditory distractor condition (quiet, changing state ending, steady state ending) for each serial position (left panel) and averaged across positions (right panel) in Experiment 2. The error bars depict the standard errors of the means.
Figure 6.
Across-trial performance for Experiment 2.
Recall performance as a function of the auditory distractor condition (quiet, changing state ending, steady state ending) and the ordinal position of a trial within a condition in Experiment 2.
Figure 7.
Stimulus presentation in Experiment 3.
Illustration of an exemplary trial in Experiment 3 for both experimental groups. In the encoding group sentences with a changing state ending and those with a steady state ending differ from each other during the presentation of the item list, while in the retention group they differ from each other in a retention interval after encoding is completed.
Figure 8.
Serial position data for Experiment 3.
Recall performance as a function of auditory distractor condition (quiet, changing state ending, steady state ending) for each serial position (left panel) and averaged across positions (right panel) in Experiment 3. In the upper panel the recall performance for the encoding group is shown, in the lower panel that for the retention group. The error bars depict the standard errors of the means.
Figure 9.
Across-trial performance for Experiment 3.
Recall performance as a function of the auditory distractor condition (quiet, changing state ending, steady state ending) and the ordinal position of a trial within a condition in Experiment 3 for both experimental groups combined.
Figure 10.
Serial position data for Experiment 4.
Recall performance as a function of auditory distractor condition (quiet, changing state ending, steady state ending) for each serial position (left panel) and averaged across positions (right panel) in Experiment 4. The error bars depict the standard errors of the means.
Figure 11.
Across-trial performance for Experiment 4.
Recall performance as a function of the auditory distractor condition (quiet, changing state ending, steady state ending) and the ordinal position of a trial within a condition in Experiment 4.