Effects of Tasks Interpolated during Rest on Reminiscence for Pursuit-Rotor Performance and Inverted-Alphabet Printing: A Test of a Consolidation Theory of Reminiscence
Available accessResearch articleFirst published online June, 1981
Effects of Tasks Interpolated during Rest on Reminiscence for Pursuit-Rotor Performance and Inverted-Alphabet Printing: A Test of a Consolidation Theory of Reminiscence
As a test of a consolidation theory of reminiscence, 150 female college students practiced inverted-alphabet printing and the pursuit rotor for 5 min., rested for 20 min., and then practiced for 2 more min. During the rest period, some subjects rested while others performed reverse-cue rotary pursuit or mirror tracing. No reduction in reminiscence produced by tasks occurring during the rest period was found. While the failure to support a consolidation theory of reminiscence could not be explained, the possibility of sex differences in response to tasks occurring during the rest period was discussed.
References
1.
AdamsJ. A.Motor skills. Annual Review of Psychology, 1964, 15, 181–202.
2.
AmmonsR. B.Acquisition of motor skill: I. Quantitative analysis and theoretical formulation. Psychological Review, 1947, 54, 263–281.
3.
BuxtonC. E.The status of research in reminiscence. Psychological Bulletin, 1943, 40, 313–340.
4.
CatalanoJ. F.WhalenP.Factors in recovery from performance decrement: activation, inhibition, and warm-up. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1967, 24, 1223–1231.
5.
EysenckH. J.Reminiscence, drive, and personality theory. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1956, 53, 328–333.
6.
EysenckH. J.A three-factor theory of reminiscence. British Journal of Psychology, 1965, 56, 163–181.
7.
EysenckH. J.FrithC. D.Reminiscence, motivation, and personality. London: Plenum, 1977.
8.
GriffithL.Comparison of the effects of interpolated activity on reminiscence for pursuit rotor performance and rote learning. (Doctoral dissertation, Univer. of Southern Mississippi)Dissertation Abstracts, 1968, 29, 1517B. (University Microfilms No. 68–14, 705).
9.
HuangD. L.PayneR. B.Individual and sex differences in reminiscence. Memory and Cognition, 1975, 3, 252–256.
10.
HullC. L.Principles of behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1943.
11.
KimbleG. A.An experimental test of a two-factor theory of inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1949, 39, 15–23.
12.
McBrideD. K.PayneR. B.Psychomotor reminiscence as a function of sex and length of rest period. Journal of Motor Behavior, 1979, 11, 59–64.
13.
McGeochJ. A.IrionA. L.The psychology of human learning. New York: Longmans, Green, 1952.
14.
RachmanS.Disinhibition and the reminiscence effect in a motor learning task. British Journal of Psychology, 1962, 53, 149–157.
15.
RachmanS.GrassiJ.Reminiscence, inhibition and consolidation. British Journal of Psychology, 1965, 56, 157–162.
16.
StelmachG. E.Reminiscence and consolidation in a gross motor task. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1968, 27, 1075–1078.
17.
WillettR. A.EysenckH. J.An experimental study of human motivation. Life Sciences, 1962, 4, 119–127.
18.
WinerB. J.Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1962.
