Similarity between stimulus and response in paired-associates learning

1960 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Umemoto
Keyword(s):  
Paired Associates

The effect of study time distribution on the learning and retention of paired associates

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mario O. de Jonge ◽  
Diane Pecher ◽  
Jan W. Van Strien ◽  
Huib Tabbers ◽  
Rene Zeelenberg
Keyword(s):  
Time Distribution ◽  
Study Time ◽  
Paired Associates

Role of affect in short-term memory for paired associates.

1968 ◽  
Vol 78 (3, Pt.1) ◽  
pp. 494-501 ◽  
Author(s):  
Calvin F. Nodine ◽  
James H. Korn
Keyword(s):  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Term Memory ◽  
Paired Associates

Does testing increase spontaneous mediation in learning semantically related paired associates?

2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (11) ◽  
pp. 1768-1778 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kit W. Cho ◽  
James H. Neely ◽  
Michael K. Brennan ◽  
Deana Vitrano ◽  
Stephanie Crocco
Keyword(s):  
Paired Associates

scholarly journals Comparing metacognitive monitoring between native and non-native speaking primary school students

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florian J. Buehler ◽  
Mariëtte H. van Loon ◽  
Natalie S. Bayard ◽  
Martina Steiner ◽  
Claudia M. Roebers
Keyword(s):  
Academic Performance ◽  
Text Comprehension ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Fourth Graders ◽  
Primary Source ◽  
Metacognitive Monitoring ◽  
School Students ◽  
Paired Associates ◽  
Performance Differences ◽  
Language Competencies

AbstractMetacognitive monitoring is a significant predictor of academic achievement and is assumed to be related to language competencies. Hence, it may explain academic performance differences between native and non-native speaking students. We compared metacognitive monitoring (in terms of resolution) between native and non-native speaking fourth graders (~ 10 year olds) in two studies. In Study 1, we matched 30 native and 30 non-native speakers and assessed their monitoring in the context of a paired-associates task, including a recognition test and confidence judgements. Study 1 revealed that recognition and monitoring did not differ between native and non-native speaking children. In Study 2, we matched 36 native and 36 non-native speakers and assessed their monitoring with the same paired-associates task. Additionally, we included a text comprehension task with open-ended questions and confidence judgments. We replicated the findings of Study 1, suggesting that recognition and monitoring do not necessarily differ between native and non-native speakers. However, native speaking students answered more open-ended questions correctly than non-native speaking students did. Nevertheless, the two groups did not differ in monitoring their answers to open-ended questions. Our results indicate that native and non-native speaking children may monitor their metacognitive resolution equally, independent of task performance and characteristics. In conclusion, metacognitive monitoring deficits may not be the primary source of the academic performance differences between native and non-native speaking students.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document