Mere Exposure to Stimulus and Response Terms and Paired-Associate Learning

1977 ◽  
Vol 41 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1167-1171
Author(s):  
J. M. Innes

Subjects learned four-item paired-associate lists by the method of anticipation. Items were composed from Turkish-like words which the subject had either never seen previously or which had been exposed 16 times in a previous familiarization process designed to minimize the induction of verbal satiation. Analysis of the data indicated significant facilitation of learning due to familiarization with the stimulus term and a significant interaction of stimulus and response terms. The experiment demonstrates the likely importance of the encoding of stimulus terms in the learning of paired-associate lists and shows that mere exposure to materials can modify later response to those materials.

1973 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 307-311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward W. C. McAllister

The present experiment tested the effects of reinforcement type (stimulus term, response term, and stimulus-response pairs) and type of recall-retention test (stimulus type or response type) as between- S variables and delay-of-reinforcement interval as a within- S variable on retention in paired-associate learning. The analysis showed that type of reinforcement and delay-of-reinforcement interval resulted in significant effects. Type of recall-retention test was not significant and interactions were nonsignificant.


2020 ◽  
Vol 228 (4) ◽  
pp. 278-290 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eylul Tekin ◽  
Henry L. Roediger

Abstract. Recent studies have shown that judgments of learning (JOLs) are reactive measures in paired-associate learning paradigms. However, evidence is scarce concerning whether JOLs are reactive in other paradigms. In old/new recognition experiments, we investigated the reactivity effects of JOLs in a levels-of-processing (LOP) paradigm. In Experiments 1 and 2, for each word, subjects saw a yes/no orienting question followed by the target word and a response. Then, they either did or did not make a JOL. The yes/no questions were about target words’ appearances, rhyming properties, or category memberships. In Experiment 3, for each word, subjects gave a pleasantness rating or counted the letter “e ”. Our results revealed that JOLs enhanced recognition across all orienting tasks in Experiments 1 and 2, and for the e-counting task in Experiment 3. This reactive effect was salient for shallow tasks, attenuating – but not eliminating – the LOP effect after making JOLs. We conclude that JOLs are reactive in LOP paradigms and subjects encode words more effectively when providing JOLs.


1976 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy J. Treat ◽  
Hayne W. Reese

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document