Associative reaction time, meaningfulness, and presentation rate in paired-associate learning.

1968 ◽  
Vol 78 (2, Pt.1) ◽  
pp. 285-291 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald Ley
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Paired Associate ◽  
Presentation Rate ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Associate Learning

Effects of Associative Reaction Time and Meaningfulness of Stimulus Terms in Forward and Backward Paired-Associate Learning

1970 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 867-873 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald Ley ◽  
David Locascio
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Recall Test ◽  
Paired Associate ◽  
Presentation Rate ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Backward Recall ◽  
Long Latency ◽  
Stimulus Recognition ◽  
Stage Analysis

48 Ss learned a list of PAs, at either a 2-sec. or 7-sec. presentation rate (PR), in which the stimulus terms were assessed on the bases of associative reaction time (RT) and meaningfulness (M). In forward anticipation learning, the effect of RT of stimulus terms was not significant but M was, with the greatest effect at the 2-sec. PR. In a backward recall test, the short-latency RT stimulus terms were recalled more frequently than the long-latency RT terms and high-M terms were recalled more frequently than low-M terms. The results were interpreted in terms of a two-stage analysis in which the effects of M were related to stimulus recognition and the effects of RT to stimulus recall.

Presentation Rate Effects on Paired Associate Learning by Attention Deficit Disordered Children

1986 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 681 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Conte ◽  
Marcel Kinsbourne ◽  
James Swanson ◽  
Harry Zirk ◽  
Marilyn Samuels
Keyword(s):  
Attention Deficit ◽  
Paired Associate ◽  
Presentation Rate ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Rate Effects

Evaluating Pictographic Symbols: An Automotive Application

1978 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Green ◽  
Richard W. Pew
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Associative Strength ◽  
Paired Associate ◽  
Reaction Time Task ◽  
Learning Task ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Automotive Application ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Time Ease

Fifty university students participated in a laboratory experiment which examined 19 pictographic symbols previously used or proposed for labelling automobile controls and displays. Association norms, measures of familiarity, and magnitude estimates of the symbols' communicativeness were collected. Twenty of these subjects also participated in a paired-associate learning task and a two-alternative, forced-choice reaction-time task in which they made same-different judgments in response to verbally presented symbol labels followed by visually presented pictograms. It was found that, in general, the relative order of merit for the individual symbols was not consistent across tasks. Specifically, ratings of communicativeness were found to be well correlated with associative strength and to a lesser extent with reaction time, but associative strength was only weakly correlated with reaction time. Ease of learning was found to be an independent measure.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document