
pmid: 7312531
This investigation examined the effects of different localizing cues on the precision with which subjects can recall the position of a target in space. The availability of the cues—vision, kinesthesis, or both—was varied during both learning and recall. Subjects (age range 26 to 58 yr.) placed the stimulus or watched it being placed. The stimulus was removed, and subjects replaced or indicated its replacement location. Results show a striking similarity of performance for all subjects and significant performance differences relative to the different cues. The results provide information about intramodal and intermodal visual and kinesthetic transfer effects and about the effects of unimodal and multimodal input in such transfer. Results confirm dominance of vision over kinesthesis, i.e., “kinesthetic memory” does not provide as accurate localizing information as does “visual memory.”
Adult, Male, Middle Aged, Form Perception, Memory, Short-Term, Space Perception, Mental Recall, Humans, Female, Kinesthesis
Adult, Male, Middle Aged, Form Perception, Memory, Short-Term, Space Perception, Mental Recall, Humans, Female, Kinesthesis
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 11 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
