Reification of phonological storage

Abstract

We question the arguments and data presented by Larsen and Baddeley (this issue 2003) in support of the phonological loop account of verbal short-term memory on a number of grounds. These include the correlation between effect size and the presence of a phonological similarity effect in the data, and the existence elsewhere in the literature of effects of articulatory suppression and interference between verbal and nonverbal information that undermines the phonological loop account. We question the idea that short-term memory phenomena are best conceived of in terms of phonological storage, and we sketch an alternative perspective that does not rely on the notion of a bespoke phonological store, an entity that we argue represents a reification.