Compound stimuli in paired-associate learning.

1964 ◽  
Vol 67 (2) ◽  
pp. 132-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonard M. Horowitz ◽  
Louis G. Kippman ◽  
Sandra A. Norman ◽  
George W. McConkie
Keyword(s):  
Paired Associate ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Compound Stimuli

Role of Context Cues in Learning: Reply to Greeno

1968 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 351-354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eli Saltz ◽  
Joel W. Ager
Keyword(s):  
Paired Associate ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Compound Stimuli ◽  
Context Cues ◽  
Valuable Service

Greeno (1968) has performed a valuable service to the understanding of the role of context cues in paired-associate learning by stating the associative summation position sufficiently precisely so that the issues between this position and a differentiation position can be examined more systematically. The writers believe that Greeno's results are consistent with the Saltz and Wickey (1967) differentiation position and are systematically at odds with an associative summation model for the effect of color in compound stimuli as found in the Saltz (1963) study.

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