AN INQUIRY INTO THE DOCTRINE OF REMOTE ASSOCIATIONS.

Abstract

The essential validity of the doctrine of remote associations was assessed. The findings of three original derived-list experiments supported a hypothesis of perception of list patterning, and were incompatible with predictions based upon remote associations. A fourth experiment supported the hypothesis that the association method produces its results through an artifact of serial position. Findings based upon the method of anticipatory and preservative errors were explained consistently by an alternative rationale that excluded remote associations. It was concluded that the doctrine of remote associations is of doubtful validity, and that serial memorization involves acquisition of the items per se, and then the learning of their positions in the list. In his now classic monograph on rote verbal learning and retention, Ebbinghaus (1885) established the concept of remote associations. His investigations led him to believe that during the memorization of a serial list of items, functional associative bonds were established not only between immediately adjacent items but also directly, and at the same time, between items farther separated from each other in the list. These latter direct connections between noncontiguous items were designated as remote associations. They presumably arose automatically as part of the ordinary process of serial memorization, with no special effort on the part of the subject to bring them about. They were conceptualized as being formed both in the forward and backward directions, that is, an item in the middle of the list could develop a forward connection with the last item and a backward connection with one of the first items. As memorization of the series proceeded, it was thought that