Nigro G N, Roak R M
Am J Ment Defic. 1987 Jan;91(4):392-7.
The claim that memory for spatial location is automatic was evaluated. Mentally retarded and nonretarded adults studied 16 objects on a matrix in front of them under one of two instructional conditions: intentional or incidental. They then tried to recall both the objects and their locations. Results showed that memory for spatial location was above chance under both instructional conditions. Intention to encode spatial location had no effect on recall. Finally, retarded and nonretarded adults differed in recall of the objects but not in recall of spatial locations. The findings support several of the criteria for automaticity proposed by Hasher and Zacks (1979) and suggest that automatic encoding of spatial location is an area of strength for retarded persons.
