Relationship of False Recognition and Paired-Associate Learning Ability with Learning of Reversal and Nonreversal Shift

1974 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 1279-1283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fred W. Ohnmacht ◽  
Richard Brody ◽  
John O'Connor
Keyword(s):  
False Recognition ◽  
Paired Associate ◽  
Recognition Task ◽  
Learning Task ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Learning Ability ◽  
Reversal Shift ◽  
Nonreversal Shift ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Relationship Of

43 Ss were administered a false-recognition task, and a paired-associate learning task. Half the Ss were given a reversal shift task and the rest a nonreversal task. The paired-associate task was found to be unrelated to both the reversal and nonreversal tasks, whereas the false-recognition task was significantly related to the reversal shift but not to the nonreversal task. False recognition was also significantly related to the initial discrimination learned in the reversal shift, nonreversal shift paradigm. These results are interpreted in terms of a two-stage recognition model.

Influence of Prior Paired-Associate Learning on False Recognition

1969 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 803-810 ◽  
Author(s):  
William P. Wallace
Keyword(s):  
False Recognition ◽  
Paired Associate ◽  
Recognition Task ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Major Portion ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Single Time ◽  
Recognition Errors

Three experiments were reported which investigated transfer from paired-associate (PA) learning to a recognition task (RL). Exp. I demonstrated that learning a PA list of A-B associates increased recognition errors to B words in RL (B words occurred a single time late in RL and A words occurred early in RL). It was argued that the appearance of the A words elicited the B associates implicitly, and this led to increased difficulty in identifying B words as first occurrences. An attempt to decrease RL errors to B words by interpolating unlearning activities between the A-B list and RL were unsuccessful (Exp. II). Exp. III demonstrated that the major portion of the increased errors to B words following PA learning was due to general PA-RL confusion and that specific A-B elicitations during RL added only slightly to this general confusion.

Paired-Associate Learning, False-Recognition Scores, and Performance in a Hierarchically Arranged Concept-Learning Task

1974 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 1207-1210
Author(s):  
Fred W. Ohnmacht ◽  
Pauline C. Grippin ◽  
John O'Connor ◽  
Richard Brody
Keyword(s):  
Concept Learning ◽  
False Recognition ◽  
Paired Associate ◽  
Learning Task ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
And Performance

This study evaluated the hypotheses that paired-associate learning would be negatively related to number of acquisition trials for simple concepts but not related to a complex one and that false recognition would be positively related to such acquisitions but most strongly to a relatively complex one. Data provided some support for these predictions.

Effect of Motivating Instructions on Verbal Learning According to Age and Race

1980 ◽  
Vol 46 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1167-1170
Author(s):  
Robert G. Summerlin ◽  
Charles V. Lair ◽  
William N. Confer
Keyword(s):  
Paired Associate ◽  
Verbal Learning ◽  
Learning Task ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Instructional Condition ◽  
Associate Learning

Young and old white ( n = 48) and black ( n = 48) women were compared on a paired-associate learning task. The groups were divided as to a motivational instructional condition of support, challenge, or neutral. Both the younger and the white groups had more correct responses and learned in fewer trials. A three-way interaction suggests that old blacks make more errors of omission and commission under supportive instructions, whereas young whites do best under challenge. Various trends and implications for these findings were discussed.

Effects of Suggestibility on Learning by Retarded and Nonretarded Students

1984 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 663-666 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annette U. Shuck ◽  
Barbara L. Ludlow
Keyword(s):  
Paired Associate ◽  
Learning Task ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Treatment Conditions ◽  
Positive Performance ◽  
Performance Suggestions ◽  
Improved Performance ◽  
Age Range ◽  
Plot Design

Mildly mentally retarded and nonretarded students (age range: 10 to 16 yr.), classified by groups according to low suggestibility, were exposed to positive, negative, or neutral suggestions concerning their performance on a paired-associate learning task. A split-plot design assessed interactions between variables of subjects' category and suggestibility and treatment conditions, such as suggestion provided and trials. Analyses of variance showed retarded students improved more. The data also suggested somewhat improved performance by subjects given a positive suggestion. The suggestibility of many retarded students may be used by trainers to facilitate faster learning of simple tasks, especially if positive performance suggestions are employed.

Effects of Language Facility in Learning

1978 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 501-506 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raymond S. Dean ◽  
Raymond W. Kulhavy
Keyword(s):  
Primary School ◽  
School Success ◽  
Paired Associate ◽  
Learning Task ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Partial Explanation ◽  
Future School

Sixty-four primary school boys were classified as being high or low in vocabulary and randomly assigned to a language mediation instruction or non-instructed condition. Children were individually administered CVC’s, paralogs, and simple words in a three trial paired-associate learning task. Locus of facilitation was found primarily in upper vocabulary groups and for familiar words rather than paralogs and CVC’s. Low vocabulary subjects produced fewer mediators and were less likely to get an item correct when a mediator was given. The performance of students with well-developed vocabularies was linked to their ability to manipulate language and language-based tasks. These data offer a partial explanation why vocabulary tests predict future school success, independent of overall intelligence.

Geheugenstructuren En Woordleren

1985 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. 55-67
Author(s):  
Gerard Nas
Keyword(s):  
Paired Associate ◽  
Vocabulary Learning ◽  
Semantic Category ◽  
Learning Task ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
L2 Vocabulary

In this article a model of foreign (L2) vocabulary learning is first developed in which the representation of the spelling, the pronunciation and the meaning(s) of a word are stored in their respective networks. Vocabulary learning in a paired associate learning task is then defined as the building of nodes in a network and as the establishing of an associative pathway between each new node (representing the spelling, pronunciation or meaning(s) of a newly learned L2 word) and the corresponding node for its L1 equivalent. In this model differences in spelling or pronunciation between L2 words and their L1 translations are expressed in terms of differences in length of their associative pathways. On the basis of the above distinctions a prediction was made about a difference in input speed and in the period of retrievability between two kinds of Arabic- Dutch word pairs. It was predicted that word pairs sharing some phonemic features would be learned sooner and remembered longer than those without any of these features in common. The above prediction was confirmed in a group experiment. Moreover, it showed that a resemblance between L2-L1 word pairs had a greater effect on retrievability than on input speed. Finally, the diverging results for one of the testwords were interpreted as indicating that also in associate learning of L2-L1 pairs the semantic category to which that word belonged had played its part. Its abstract meaning was assumed to have negatively affected the time needed to store the word in memory.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document