Note on Suggestibility and Clustering

Abstract

In recalling lists of words composed of representatives of a number of categories but presented in a random order, Ss tend to cluster words of the same category. This finding has been called clustering. Clustering has been shown to be a function of a number of variables and subject to alternate interpretations (Kintsch, 1970, pp. 247-253). I was unable to find any studies that related clustering to suggestibility. Indeed, most studies in clustering manipulate list composition or procedural variables rather than individual differences among Ss. This study relates suggestibility and clustering. Two classes were first administered the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility (Shor & Orne, 1962). Approximately 1 mo. later the same classes were run in a clustering study. The procedure used with the Harvard scale was that specified in the instructions. The list and procedure used in the clustering study was identical with the original work of Bousfield (1953). A slightly modified Ratio Repetition (RR) measure was used to score for clustering. The clustering data were also anaIyzed for the total number of words recalled and the number of intrusions (separately for within and outside of category). Complete data on 50 Ss were available for analysis. Adequate variability was produced on all measures except for the outside-ofcategory intrusions. Correlations, computed between the suggestion measure and clustering, number-of-words, and categorical intrusions, in the same order as above, were: .05, .14, and -.12. There were too few non-categorical intrusions (total of 7) for analysis. Alternate measures of clustering might have been used but in view of the above results and the high intercorrelations among the various measures (Shuell, 1969) the results would not be worth the effort. Thus, suggestibility does not appear to relate to the various retention measures used in studies of recall of lists whose items belong to several categories.