Production and Use of Mnemonic Phrases in Paired-Associate Learning with Digits as Response-Terms

1973 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 923-930 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giyoo Hatano ◽  
Keiko Kuhara
Keyword(s):  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Paired Associate ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Paired Associates

Undergraduate students learned paired-associates, with names of shops as stimulus-terms and sets of 4 digits (“telephone numbers”) as response-terms. In Exp. I, Ss, by assigning one of several alternative pronunciations, or “readings,” to each digit, as permitted in modern Japanese, were quickly able to produce mnemonic words or phrases for about half the 20 pairs, and these devices greatly facilitated Ss' recall and recognition of the numbers. In Exp. II, experimental Ss given these mnemonic phrases performed significantly better in recall and recognition of the numbers than control Ss. The nature of verbal ‘coding’ is discussed in detail.

Reinforcement-Test Sequences in Paired-Associate Learning

1966 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 879-919 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chizuko Izawa
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
Paired Associate ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Paired Associates ◽  
Optimal Programming ◽  
Per Se ◽  
Fluctuation Model

To obtain evidence as to whether either learning or forgetting occurs on unreinforced trials and to adduce principles of optimal programming of reinforced (R) and test (T) trials, two experiments were planned each having four conditions with different repetitive R-T sequences: RTRT …, RRTRRT …, RTTRTT …, and RRTTRRTT. … 50 college students in each experiment learned 5 paired associates under each condition. Performance on successive Ts without intervening reinforcement suggested that neither learning nor forgetting occurred on Ts per se. However, the occurrence of Ts increased the effectiveness of subsequent Rs. A stimulus fluctuation model accounted for the major acquisition and retention phenomena, including the differential rates of learning under the different R-T sequences.

Perceptual and Linguistic Encoding in Recognition Memory and Paired-Associate Learning

1971 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 803-806 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edgar A. Chenoweth ◽  
Gerry L. Wilcove
Keyword(s):  
Recognition Memory ◽  
Paired Associate ◽  
Memory Task ◽  
Psychology Students ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Introductory Psychology ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Paired Associates

A perceptual paired-associates task was presented in which pictures of objects and consonant-vowel-consonant trigrams served as stimulus and response members of the P-A unit, respectively. Introductory psychology students had been classified previously into encoding groups on the basis of their performance on a memory task. The prediction that the linguistic encoders would learn the PA task more slowly than the perceptual encoders was supported by the results.

Temporal Relations and Meaningfulness in Paired-Associate Learning

1965 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 491-497 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald J. Mueller ◽  
Robert M. W. Travers
Keyword(s):  
Paired Associate ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Response Side ◽  
Paired Associates ◽  
Present Procedure ◽  
Response Meaningfulness ◽  
Stimulus Side ◽  
High Stimulus ◽  
Anticipation Method

Each of 34 Ss was presented with a list of 12 paired associates which were arranged according to high-low or low-high stimulus and response meaningfulness and also in a simultaneous or sequential time relationship. Meaningfulness level on the stimulus side of the dyad rather than on the response side was found to be more crucial for learning, and significantly more learning occurred also when the dyads were presented in the simultaneous condition. The findings were discussed in terms of both association theory and the differences between the present procedure and the conventional anticipation method.

Efficiency of the Add-A-Pair Method in Learning Paired-Associates

1972 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 411-414
Author(s):  
Wilton L. Gibson ◽  
Lewis R. Lieberman
Keyword(s):  
Paired Associate ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Single Pair ◽  
Digit Number ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Paired Associates ◽  
Pair Method

An unrecognized implication of Rock's (1957) analysis of paired-associate learning is that a most efficient way of learning a list is to begin with a single pair and add a pair each trial until the whole list is learned. A list of 17 difficult, single-lettered, 2-digit number pairs was used. 18 control Ss received all pairs for 9 trials, while 18 experimental Ss used the add-a-pair method. By the last trial and 153 exposures each, experimental Ss knew 9.72 pairs compared to 6.78 for controls, a significant advantage.

Paired-Associate Learning, Mediation Value and the Drop-Out Method

1968 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 671-674
Author(s):  
Ronald L. Cohen ◽  
Andreas Murray
Keyword(s):  
Incremental Learning ◽  
Paired Associate ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Drop Out ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Paired Associates

Pools of paired associates (double or single letters paired with one- or two-digit numbers) were constructed so that all pairs within a pool had approximately the same mediation value (MV), this latter value being defined as the ease with which a mediator can be found within a pair. These pools were then used in a drop-out experiment where a list of 8 pairs were learned to a criterion of one correct repetition. The main result was that rate of presentation, mean MV of the pool and drop-out/constant procedure were significant. That the variable drop-out/constant procedure proved significant is contrary to the results obtained by Rock, and this is discussed in relation to the question of one-trial versus incremental learning.

Paired-Associate Learning by Anticipation and Non-Anticipation Methods: Supplementary Data

1965 ◽  
Vol 16 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1123-1124 ◽  
Author(s):  
James H. Reynolds
Keyword(s):  
Paired Associate ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Supplementary Data ◽  
Single Test ◽  
Learning Methods ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Initial Testing ◽  
Paired Associates ◽  
In Series ◽  
Anticipation Method

Groups learning paired-associates by either the anticipation or non-anticipation method were given a single test after 6 trials and then 5 more tests in series after 9 trials. No differences between learning methods were obtained on either initial testing or the recall series. The results confirm previous findings that the methods yield equivalent learning, suggesting that informational feedback is unnecessary for verbal associative formation.

Analysis of Wisc Coding: 4. Paired-Associate Learning and Performance Strategies

1973 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 695-698 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. G. Johnson ◽  
J. G. Lyle
Keyword(s):  
Paired Associate ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Training Procedure ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Paired Associates ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Learning And Performance ◽  
Performance Strategies

A training procedure was used to ensure equal familiarity with the number-symbol pairs of the code of the WISC for both good and poor coders. The former learned more readily than the latter, but subsequent scores on the coding task were equivalent for both groups when account was taken of differences in writing speed. Two possible sources of slower performance were investigated: time taken to refer to the code and time spent scanning completed work. These were not found to be related to poor coding performance. It was concluded that learning of the paired-associates and writing speed discriminated between good and poor coders.

Experimenter-Made vs Subject-Made Mnemonics in Paired-Associate Learning

1968 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 227-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lewis R. Lieberman ◽  
William M. Walters ◽  
William Miles Cox
Keyword(s):  
Paired Associate ◽  
Learning Task ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Scholastic Aptitude Test ◽  
The Other ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Paired Associates ◽  
Scholastic Aptitude ◽  
Mnemonic Devices ◽  
The Difference

Two groups of Ss learned 42 pairs of words as a standard paired-associates learning task. One group was provided with mnemonic devices as an aid in learning the pairs and the other group was told to make up their own mnemonic aids. The difference in the number of pairs learned was not significant. Correlation between recall scores and Scholastic Aptitude Test verbal scores approached 0. There was a high correlation between the number of Ss who recalled a given pair correctly in the two groups. This suggests that certain pairs of words are easier to learn than others, regardless of whether S is given a mnemonic aid or has to contrive his own.

Temporary Forgetting of Nonsense Syllables in Paired-Associate Learning

1974 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 915-918
Author(s):  
Jeanne K. Andriot
Keyword(s):  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Sensory Input ◽  
Paired Associate ◽  
Intermediate Stage ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Limited Capacity ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Multi Stage ◽  
Memory Buffer

34 undergraduate students were assigned to learn one of two lists of 8 CVCs paired with two-digit numbers. After the “memory buffer,” a limited-capacity intermediate stage between sensory input and long-term store, was filled, all Ss forgot old syllables when adding new ones a significant number of times. The CVCs of one list had an association value of 80% and those of the other list an association value of 20%. Although CVCs having lower association values required a greater number of trials to reach criterion there was no significant interaction between association value and the displacement of syllables. This study was designed to support Atkinson's (1969), Feigenbaum's (1969), and Talland's (1968) multi-stage learning models by showing that after the memory buffer is filled in paired-associate learning using the anticipation method, new syllables are learned at the expense of forgetting old syllables.

Episodic and Semantic Memory Components of Verbal Paired-Associate Learning

Assessment ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard W. Elwood
Keyword(s):  
Episodic Memory ◽  
Semantic Memory ◽  
Paired Associate ◽  
Clinical Sample ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Paired Associates ◽  
Immediate Recall ◽  
Category Fluency

One argument for distinguishing between hard (i.e., low-associate) and easy (i.e., high-associate) paired-associate learning is that hard associates provide a selective measure of episodic memory, whereas easy associates reflect both episodic and semantic memory. This study examined correlations between hard and easy verbal paired associates and episodic and semantic memory in a mixed clinical sample. When age and education were controlled, hard paired associates correlated as much with category fluency (i.e., semantic memory) as they did with immediate recall or retention (i.e., episodic memory). Correlations with hard and easy associates differed more on retention than on immediate recall. Letter fluency was essentially unrelated to either easy or hard associates. The study concludes that hard paired associate learning should not be presumed to selectively measure episodic memory.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document