Relationship of sociometric rank to paired-associate learning.

1970 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-35
Author(s):  
Manuel Ramirez
Keyword(s):  
Paired Associate ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Relationship Of

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.

scholarly journals Relationship of paired-associate learning and single trial free recall

1969 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 330-331 ◽  
Author(s):  
David S. Gorfein ◽  
Christopher Arbak ◽  
Diana Graves
Keyword(s):  
Free Recall ◽  
Paired Associate ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Single Trial ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Relationship Of

Reactivity of Judgments of Learning in a Levels-of-Processing Paradigm

2020 ◽  
Vol 228 (4) ◽  
pp. 278-290 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eylul Tekin ◽  
Henry L. Roediger
Keyword(s):  
Target Word ◽  
Paired Associate ◽  
Judgments Of Learning ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Levels Of Processing ◽  
Pleasantness Rating ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Counting Task ◽  
Reactive Effect ◽  
Target Words

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.

Age, pacing, and imagery in paired-associate learning.

1976 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy J. Treat ◽  
Hayne W. Reese
Keyword(s):  
Paired Associate ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Associate Learning
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document