48 Ss learned a list of PAs, at either a 2-sec. or 7-sec. presentation rate (PR), in which the stimulus terms were assessed on the bases of associative reaction time (RT) and meaningfulness (M). In forward anticipation learning, the effect of RT of stimulus terms was not significant but M was, with the greatest effect at the 2-sec. PR. In a backward recall test, the short-latency RT stimulus terms were recalled more frequently than the long-latency RT terms and high-M terms were recalled more frequently than low-M terms. The results were interpreted in terms of a two-stage analysis in which the effects of M were related to stimulus recognition and the effects of RT to stimulus recall.
References
1.
BattigW. F.SperaA. J.Rated association values of numbers from 0–100. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1962, 1, 200–202.
2.
GossA. E.Comments on Professor Noble's paper. In CoferC. N.MusgraveB. S. (Eds.), Verbal behavior and learning problems and processes. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963. Pp. 119–155.
3.
LeyR.Associative reaction time, meaningfulness, and presentation rate in paired-associate learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1968, 78, 285–291.
4.
LeyR.AndersonL.Associative reaction time of response terms in paired-associate learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969, 79, 378–380.
5.
LeyR.LocascioD.Associative reaction time and meaningfulness of stimulus terms in paired-associate learning. Paper presented at the Psychonomic Society meeting, November, 1969, St. Louis, Mo.
6.
LeyR.LocascioD.Associative reaction time and meaningfulness of CVCVC response terms in paired-associate learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970, 83, 445–450.
7.
MartinE.Stimulus meaningfulness and paired-associate transfer: An encoding variability hypothesis. Psychological Review, 1968, 75, 421–441.
8.
UnderwoodB. J.SchulzR. W.Meaningfulness and verbal learning. Chicago: Lippincott, 1960.
