Performance On The Associative Phase Of Paired Associate Learning As A Function Of Stimulus M And Length Of Test Interval

Author : Patricia Ann Diewold
Publisher :
ISBN 13 :
Total Pages : 0 pages
Book Rating : 4.:/5 (142 download)

DOWNLOAD NOW!

Download or read book The Effect of Response Availability on Paired-associate Learning written by Patricia Ann Diewold and published by . This book was released on 1965 with total page 0 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: Two hypotheses were considered concerning the effect of response availability on associative learning. The Underwood and Schulz (i960) "availability" hypothesis states that the response must be available in the response-recall sense before associative learning can begin. The alternative hypothesis states that response-learning and associative learning are independent processes. In a 2 x 3 factorial design (Experiment #l), Ss either received response pretraining or had no response pretraining, and subsequently they learned a list of pairs and received 1 , 3 , or 6 paired-associate recall trials. Following paired-associate recall all the Ss received an associative-matching test in which both the stimulus and the response terms were present. The paired-associate recall scores for the pretraining groups were greater than those for the no pretraining groups for the three and six-trial groups and these differences were significant statistically. On the associative-matching test there were only slight differences favoring the pretraining groups. The difference between pretraining and no pretraining groups in paired-associate recall was expected, to remain in the associative-matching test if response availability facilitates associative learning, and the difference was expected to disappear if response-learning and associative learning are independent processes. The results essentially support the independent process hypothesis. There was some evidence (Experiment # 2 ) that the difference between pretraining and no pretraining groups in paired-associate recall scores was due to the fact that response availability exerts its influence on paired-associate scores at the time of recall rather than during associative learning. Some of the difference may also be due to pacing or other performance factors peculiar to the anticipation method of testing. It was concluded that the relationship between response-learning and associative learning may be more complicated than visualized in this thesis, and that response availability may have some facilitating effect on associative learning. However, the results of these experiments offer good, reason to reconsider the Underwood and Schulz (i960) position concerning the necessity of response availability for associative learning, and to consider instead the alternative position that response-learning and associative learning are independent processes.