Free Recall Condition Research Articles

Impaired recall and the memory disturbance in presenile dementia.

Although subjects with presenile dementia have a very poor ability to retrieve material previously presented for learning under conditions of free recall and the usual type of recognition test, their performance was found to be not significantly different from normal controls when the initial letters of the correct words were provided at the time of recall. This finding raises the possibility that the long-term memory failure in presenile dementia may not be due to an inability to establish new material in the long-term store, as had previously been thought, but to a difficulty in retrieving that information.

Long-term retention as a function of word concreteness under conditions of free recall

Acquisition and long-term retention of concrete (C) and abstract (A) words were investigated under conditions of multiple-trial free recall. Both unmixed and mixed lists were used in original learning. Retention was tested either 1 rain or 1 week after attainment of the learning criterion. Acquisition was faster and retention was higher for C than for A words. These differences were more pronounced for mixed than for unmixed lists.

Memory for words recently classified

This paper describes research whose goal is to determine the implications of verba] classificatory, judgments for recognition memory and recall. Toward this end, St were required to answer 100 queries of attribution and superordination ds a TWINGE sudden? Is SPINACH ecstatic? Is a CORKSCREW an opener? Is a DUNGEON a scholar? before being tested unexpectedly on their ability to remember either the uppercase "keywords" or the lowercase "descriptors." Lexical memory did not depend on whether a word had been part of an attributive or a superordinate query. But words from "incongruous" queries almost invariably were more poorly remembered-under conditions of free recall, cued recall, and recognition memory-than words from "congruous" queries. Congruous cues, but not incongruous ones, greatly facilitated recall, with keywords being more effective cues than descriptors. Recognition memory of keywords was uniformly superior to that of descriptors. It is argued that the large and pervasive memorial advantages of congruity arise because a congruous query, unlike an incongruous one, fosters a relational encoding of keyword and descriptor.

A Test of Current Explanations of the Effect of Item Familiarity on Memory

The effects of item familiarity in memory have been variously ascribed to differences in storage or retrieval efficiency, response availability, and response bias. The experiments reported here attempted to discriminate between these explanations, using a model of the response process based on signal-detection theory. Memory for English surnames varying in frequency of occurrence was tested under free recall and recognition conditions. In both conditions, common names appeared more often among the incorrect responses, reflecting a response bias in their favour; but storage and/or retrieval of these names, as measured by the parameter d′, was less efficient than for uncommon ones. The finding of similar results in recognition and recall shows that the effect remains even when differences in response availability are removed by the use of a probe.

EFFECTS OF CONSTRAINED RECALL TRAINING ON CHILDREN'S PERFORMANCE IN A VERBAL MEMORY TASK

SCRIBNER, SYLVIA, and COLE, MICHAEL. Effects of Constrained Recall Training on Children's Performance in a Verbal Memory Task. CHILD DEVELOPMENT, 1972, 43, 845-857. Second, fourth, and sixth graders were trained under conditions of Constrained and Cued recall on a list of randomly ordered nouns comprising 4 categories of things. Constrained groups were required to recall words by category on the first 3 trials, while Cued groups were reminded of the categories after list presentation but were permitted to recall in any order. Effects of these 2 practice methods were tested on a fourth trial with the original list and a transfer trial with a new list under standard free-recall conditions. Children with previous Constrained practice recalled more words than Cued children on the free trial with the old material, but did not maintain this advantage on the transfer trial when new material was introduced. On both fourth and transfer trials, children having Constrained practice showed greater categorical clustering than Cued children and continued to manifest errors characteristic of forced category recall.

Cued recall and free recall as a function of the number of items per cue.

This research was designed to determine whether a cue for retrieval is limited or unlimited in terms of the number of discrete stimulus items for which it can act during memorization. Several lists of words were constructed so that each list could be divided into groups of equal numbers of words beginning with the same letter. The number of items per initial-letter cue varied from list to list, over a range from 1 to 12. When S s were provided with the initial-letter cues during each recall period, cued-recall memorization varied inversely with the number of words in a category. The larger the category size, the poorer was cued-recall performance. Under conditions of free recall where no aids were provided, memorization did not vary as a function of the distribution of initial letters in the stimulus list. Free-recall performance was similar to cued-recall performance when there were 6 or 8 items per cue; free-recall performance was superior to cued-recall performance when there were 12 items per cue. It was suggested that the efficiency of a cue for retrieval is dependent upon the number of items for which it must act, and that an efficient strategy for remembering must be some compromise between the number of cues used and the number of items assigned to each cue.

Differences in free and serial recall of categorized lists

Two experiments investigated whether differences in clustering and amount of recall produced by free and serial recall of categorized lists reflected differences in how items were stored or how they were retrieved. An experimental condition with serial recall instructions before and free recall instructions after list presentation (and storage) was compared with standard serial and free recall conditions. The results showed that different instructions influenced how the items were retrieved and reported but not how many items were stored.

Structuration and destructuration of responses in free-recall learning

In a free-recall learning experiment, S s first learned a list of 20 familiar words. They were then tested with 10-word and 15-word subsets of the originally learned list, under conditions of single-trial free-recall conditions. The subsets partially overlapped each other on successive trials. In the final phase of the experiment, S s recalled the original 20-word list. The results showed that S s cannot reproduce correctly parts of the learned whole list. This result is explained in terms of the destructuration process that results from the omission of some of the elements of the associated chain developed by S s during original learning. The results support the general hypothesis that structuration is a necessary condition of free-recall learning.

Subjective organization and list organization as determinants of free-recall and serial-recall memorization

Two experiments investigated the relation between three independent variables—S's tendency toward subjective organization, preferred vs. nonpreferred sequence of presentation, and free vs. serial recall—and the memorization of a serially presented list of 16 unrelated English words. The results indicated that, under conditions of free recall, high organizers learned both orders of presentation equally well, but the recall performance of poor organizers was facilitated by the preferred order of presentation. Under serial-recall instructions, the order of presentation affected both types of organizers, but high organizers achieved better performance scores than did low organizers-within each order-of-presentation category. These results were discussed in terms of the relative efficiency of serial-recall as opposed to free-recall memorization, and in terms of the general applicability of subjective organization as an individual difference in “learning ability.”

Cued recall and free recall as a function of the number of items per cue

This research was designed to determine whether a cue for retrieval is limited or unlimited in terms of the number of discrete stimulus items for which it can act during memorization. Several lists of words were constructed so that each list could be divided into groups of equal numbers of words beginning with the same letter. The number of items per initial-letter cue varied from list to list, over a range from 1 to 12. When S s were provided with the initial-letter cues during each recall period, cued-recall memorization varied inversely with the number of words in a category. The larger the category size, the poorer was cued-recall performance. Under conditions of free recall where no aids were provided, memorization did not vary as a function of the distribution of initial letters in the stimulus list. Free-recall performance was similar to cued-recall performance when there were 6 or 8 items per cue; free-recall performance was superior to cued-recall performance when there were 12 items per cue. It was suggested that the efficiency of a cue for retrieval is dependent upon the number of items for which it must act, and that an efficient strategy for remembering must be some compromise between the number of cues used and the number of items assigned to each cue.

Three estimates of the word span and their stability over the adult years.

Three estimates of the immediate word span were compared in groups of men representing each decade between the ages of 20 and 69 years. No systematic change with age was found in free recall or in partial recall requiring the reproduction of the unrepeated word in lists of four to seven items. When the instruction was to report the entire list but leave the unrepeated word last, performance steadily deteriorated with age. Mean success in recall decreased on three criteria, and error by false terminal placement increased from each decade to the next. The results support the hypothesis that capacity to perform simultaneously two such operations as sub-vocal rehearsal of one item and vocal enumeration of the other items shrinks with the advancing years. This interpretation of the findings agrees with other observations about age-related changes in perceptual-motor skills and cognitive capacity, and indicates the manner in which an increased propensity to forgetfulness with the advancing years originates in immediate memory. It is also noted that in the general population the immediate word span is well below that determined in college students, even under the least exacting conditions of free recall, and that the additional requirement to search for, select and test a required item does not further restrict the word span below the age of 50.

Courses of Misrecall over Long-Term Retention Intervals as Related to Strength of Pre-Experimental Habits of Word Association

Following a proaction paradigm, 670 Ss were trained with two lists containing five of the secondary associates (R2) to Russell-Jenkins stimulus words, and were tested 2 min., 20 mm., 2 days, or 28 days later for retention of the second list. During recall, half of the Ss were administered the five stimulus words corresponding to the five R2 words of the second list (stimulated condition), and half did not receive the stimulus words (not-stimulated condition). The stimulus words were divisible into three categories, in effect varying the cultural associative probabilities at each retention interval. Altogether, there were 24 groups completing a 4 × 2 × 3 factorial design. The retention of R2s decreased with time and the effect of stimulation was to raise their level of production above groups not so stimulated. As R2s decreased with time, intrusions of R1s (primaries) and Ra-nS (sum of Ra to R n) became more numerous where the cultural probabilities suggested this ought to happen. After 28 days, Ss still showed strong evidence of the training exposure but performance was more like that of free-associating Ss than that of shorter retention groups. In the not-stimulated condition, intrusions from unidentified sources (classified as Remainder) were more numerous the longer the retention interval. Collectively, these data support the conclusion that the amount of proactive interference via specific pre-experimental word-word habits increases as a function of time. An item analysis suggested a monotonic pattern of rs for forgetting under stimulated conditions, but not under conditions of free recall. This was interpreted to mean that forgetting when stimulated was more a process of complication than simplification and resembles a process sometimes found in motor-skills retention. Other correlational analyses proved useful tools for describing forgetting; questions pertaining to the behavior of items were quite as intriguing as those about Ss. Also, more variance could be accounted for after long than short retention intervals.

The effect of order of presentation on learning of “unrelated” words

Two input orders of a set of 16 words were constructed on the basis of output orders of the same set of words given by Ss in an earlier free-recall learning experiment. The High Organization (HO) order was highly congruous with the output orders obtained in the earlier experiments while the Low Organization (LO) order was highly incongruous. One group of Ss learned the word presented in the HO order, the other group in the LO order. In Experiment I, learning took place under conditions of free recall, in Experiment II, under conditions of serial anticipation. In both experiments, HO order was learned considerably faster than the LO order.

Free recall of paired associates as a function of meaningfulness

Summary The free recall of a list containing Lo m′-Lo m′, Lo m′-Hi m′, Hi m′-Lo m′, and Hi m′-Hi m′ pairs was investigated. The aims of the research were to examine the generality of the relationship between meaningfulness and acquisition, and to examine the possibility that the greater effects of response-M usually obtained can be attributed to the greater emphasis on response-recall under the conditions of the method of anticipation. The conditions of free recall of pairs place equal emphasis on stimulus and response recall. Under these conditions it was expected that the greater effects of variations in response-M should be eliminated. Each type of pair was found to differ significantly from the remaining three pairs. The pairs were found to rank in the following order of increasing difficulty: Hi-Hi, Hi-Lo, Lo-Hi, Lo-Lo. These results as well as the results of additional analysis were considered as supporting the present interpretation of the effects of response-M on anticipatory paired-associate learning. The results also indicate that when both stimuli and responses have to be recalled, stimulus-M is more influential than response-M in determining paired-associate learning.

The effect of stimulus and response meaningfulness when response availability is equated

Summary The main purpose of this study was to examine the effects of stimulus-M and response-M on paired-associate learning when the low- and high-M responses are made equally available. The procedure for equating response availability consisted of learning the response items in random serial order to a criterion of complete free recall. Immediately following the criterial trial, S learned a list of paired associates by the method of anticipation. Preliminary Experiments A and B were concerned with some basic effects of item-learning. The results of Experiment A showed that item-learning under conditions of free recall does not affect the relative M values of low- and high-M items. Experiment B showed that low- and high-M items are equally available in short-term retention despite the fact that low-M items are acquired in free-recall learning at a much slower rate than high-M items. The main experiment compared the acquisition of Lo-Lo, Lo-Hi, Hi-Lo and Hi-Hi lists with and without prior response-learning. A different group of 11 Ss was assigned to each of the eight conditions. These main predictions concerning the effects of prior item-learning were derived from the two-stage analysis of associative learning: (1) prior item learning should facilitate acquisition of all four lists; (2) when stimulus-M is constant, pairs comprised of Hi M and Lo M responses should not differ in ease of learning; (3) when response-M is constant, pairs with Hi M stimuli should be acquired more rapidly than pairs with Lo M stimuli; (4) the difference in performance for the pairs which differ in stimulus M should be localized in the associative stage of learning. Analyses were performed of the trials to criterion, trials to first response occurrence regardless of placement, and the difference between the trial of initial response occurrence and first correct pairing. Only the first prediction given above was supported. The results were discussed as they relate to the two-stage analysis of associative learning.

Sources of intratrial interference in immediate recall of paired associates

Summary This experiment was concerned with intralist retention of paired associates. On the basis of the observation that an item is practically always recalled immediately after its presentation and that its recall is less than perfect when other items are presented for learning (input) and attempted recall (output) in the intralist retention interval, two sources of intratrial interference, associated with the operations of inputting and outputting, were postulated as being responsible for the decreasing availability of the learned item in recall. An experimental design was used that permitted the separation, and the evaluation of the effects, of these two sources of interference. This was done by systematically varying the sequence in which list items were recalled. Each of 50 S s learned 20 lists of ten paired associates under different conditions of input and output sequence on a single trial. The results can be summarized as follows. (1) In general, probability of recall of an individual item is greatly affected by the position of the item in the input and output sequence. (2) When the item in the last input position is recalled in the first output position, its retention is practically perfect. (3) The probabilities of recall of items under other combinations of input and output position vary considerably, in some cases being as low as .20. (4) The recall of items in early input positions is relatively little affected by their position in the output sequence. (5) The recall of items in late input positions decreases systematically with their position in the output sequence. These findings were evaluated in the light of the two hypothesized sources of intratrial interference. Apart from the finding of primacy effects—higher recall of early input items than of middle input items—the data seemed to reflect the operation of input and output interference. The previously reported findings that the shape of the serial position curve differs under conditions of serial and free recall were discussed in terms of the observed interaction between input and output position of individual items. Some implications of the findings for the problem of one-trial versus incremental learning of associations were also briefly mentioned.