![Glanzer and cunitz 1966 serial position effect results](https://kumkoniak.com/55.jpg)
Behavioral results from two experiments confirmed this prediction. Analyses tested the prediction that a WM task emphasizing later items in a list (judgment of recency) would encourage exaggerated recency effects and attenuated primacy effects, while a task emphasizing earlier items (judgment of primacy) would encourage exaggerated primacy effects and attenuated recency effects. Two experiments varied task-demands by requiring participants to remember lists of letters and to then respond to a subsequent two-item probe by indicating either the item that was presented later in the list (judgment of recency) or the item was presented earlier (judgment of primacy).
![glanzer and cunitz 1966 serial position effect results glanzer and cunitz 1966 serial position effect results](https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/convertize-prd/tactic/en/8.gif)
The present study investigates whether a pattern of larger recency effects and smaller primacy effects reported in previous working memory studies is specific to task conditions used in those studies, or generalizes across manipulations of task-demand. Ongoing debate surrounds the capacity and characteristics of the focus of attention.
![glanzer and cunitz 1966 serial position effect results glanzer and cunitz 1966 serial position effect results](https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/convertize-prd/tactic/en/170.gif)