scholarly journals Response latency as a function of list length in paired-associate learning

1970 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 239-240
Author(s):  
John Ceraso ◽  
Leonard Bader ◽  
Marshall Silverstein
Keyword(s):  
Response Latency ◽  
List Length ◽  
Paired Associate ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Associate Learning

Effects of Semantic Consensus Index on Associative Response Strength

1973 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 239-249
Author(s):  
Rabindra N. Kanungo
Keyword(s):  
Response Latency ◽  
Good Predictor ◽  
Paired Associate ◽  
Response Competition ◽  
Response Strength ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Learning Situation ◽  
Inhibitory Effects ◽  
Associate Learning ◽  
Consensus Index

2 experiments that test the validity of the Semantic Consensus Index are reported. The effects of this index on measures of associative response strength were measured in Exp. I. Results showed that keeping both meaningfulness and imagery constant, the index seems to be a good predictor of response latency. In Exp. II, its effects in a paired-associate learning situation were examined; results suggest that the semantic consensus value of stimulus items can be used to predict facilitatory and inhibitory effects of response competition in paired-associate learning.

A model for response latency in paired-associate learning

1966 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Suppes ◽  
Guy Groen ◽  
Madeleine Schlag-Rey
Keyword(s):  
Response Latency ◽  
Paired Associate ◽  
Paired Associate Learning ◽  
Associate Learning

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