Frequency Theory Of Verbal Discrimination Learning Research Articles

False Recognition of Synonyms of Right and Wrong Items in Multiple-Item Recognition Learning

The hypothesis that right items are processed at a featurally deeper level than wrong items was tested. After one, two, or four study trials on a list of paired right and wrong items, subjects were asked to decide whether individual items, including new ones that were synonyms of the prior ones or unrelated to them, were old or new and, if old, had been right or wrong. A false-recognition effect was found for synonyms of both right and wrong items, suggesting that wrong items, as well as right, are processed at a semantic level. However, that effect took more study trials to appear for synonyms of wrong items, reflecting the disparity between right and wrong items in the rates at which their features accrue frequency units. Implicit in Ekstrand, Wallace, and Underwood's (1966) frequency theory of verbal-discrimination learning - that is to say, multiple-item recognition learning - is the assumption that the processing of right items does not differ qualitatively from the processing of wrong items. Processing consists of representational and/or rehearsal responses to items whether they function as right or wrong in the pairs. That is, the processing of right items is distinguishable from the processing of wrong items only in terms of the greater number of responses elicited by right items. It is intuitively ap

Effects of percentage occurrence of response members and its method of presentation on verbal discrimination learning and transfer

Each of 144 Ss learned two verbal discrimination (VD) lists for six trials. Two levels of percentage occurrence of response members (100% or 50%) were combined factorially with two methods of presentation and three transfer paradigms (C1-I2, C2-I1, C2-I2). In first-list learning, with one method of presentation in the 50,% ORM entire list was presented with only half the correct (C) items designated on each study trial, while in the second method only half the list was presented with all C items underlined. There were no differences between the two methods in the 100% ORM condition. The results indicated that % ORM was a significant variable in first-list learning, supporting the findings of Newby and Young (1972). No effect was found for method of presentation. Also, no real significant effect of these two variables was found in VD transfer. All results were interpreted in terms of the frequency theory of VD learning.

Noun Imagery in Verbal-Discrimination Learning and Recall

This study assessed the effects of high versus low noun imagery in verbal-discrimination learning and recall. The results showed that high-imagery right terms, wrong terms, or pairs led to faster acquisition than did low-imagery pairs. Measures of free recall after learning indicated that recall of low-imagery items from pairs heterogeneous in imagery was masked by recall of high-imagery items. This experiment was designed to further investigate how noun imagery as a task variable may supplement the operation of an experimental-frequency mechanism (Ekstrand, Wallace, and Underwood, 1966) in verbaldiscrimination learning. The frequency theory of verbal-discrimination learning proposed by Ekstrand et al. postulates that intrapair discriminations between 'wrong' and 'right' terms are based on cues provided by differential frequencies of responding to the two items. The primary sources of differential frequencyunit accrual are assumed to be representational responses, pronunciation responses, rehearsal of correct responses, and implicit associative responses. In a typical situation where both members of a pair start with equal frequency and no associates are present, representational responses and pronunciation responses should be equally divided between wrong and right members of a pair. As practice progresses, however, rehearsal of correct responses enables the total response frequency to the right terms to exceed the total response frequency to the wrong terms. Ekstrand et al. referred to the selection of the more frequent or familiar of the two alternatives as Rule 1. They also suggested that under special circumstances where the wrong term has a higher initial frequency, subjects might be able to use another rule, Rule 2 ('Always choose the less frequent or familiar item'), to learn the list.

Conceptual Associations and Verbal-Discrimination Learning

Tests were made of the effects of conceptual associations among words, a type of associative relationship not previously manipulated, on verbal-discrimination learning. The associations had no appreciable affect on performance, and it is concluded that implicit associative responses, even if they occur, are a minor source of frequency accrual compared with the input from the perception and rehearsal of the correct word in a pair. The frequency theory of verbal-discrimination learning, as originally formulated (Ekstrand, Wallace, and Underwood, 1966), identified two different sources of frequency. One was the direct frequency resulting from the perception of an item, from its pronunciation, and from its rehearsal. The other was indirect, resulting from preexperimental associative relationships among the words. If two words in a list were associatively related (e.g., 'table'-'chair'), it was assumed that when 'table' was presented, 'chair' occurred implicitly, and that this implicit occurrence must be considered to have been an increment in frequency for 'chair.' From this assumption follow certain predictions about difficulties in learning. For example, if 'table' were a correct word in a pair, and 'chair' were an incorrect word in a different pair, learning should be more difficult than in the case of a list where no such associative relationships existed, for the implicit frequencies accruing to 'chair' should make the discrimination between 'chair' and the correct word in its pair more difficult than if 'chair' had not received implicit frequencies. Although the experiment that accompanied the original publication of the theory gave some support to the role of implicit associates in estab

Verbal Discrimination: Re-Pairing, Language Frequency, and Associative Properties of the Stimuli

Four experiments provide evidence that (a) language frequency of the stimuli can influence the rate of learning of a verbal discrimination, (b) re-pairing of the 'correct' and 'incorrect' members of pairs has little effect if introduced from the outset but produces performance decrements if introduced when the list is nearly learned, (c) these re-pairing decrements occur differentially for lists that differ in preexperimental interitem associations, and (d) the intrapair associations formed during the learning of a verbal-discrimination task are not incidental to performance on that task. The present paper reports the results of four experiments on verbaldiscrimination learning. These experiments manipulated the associative properties and the language frequency of stimuli, as well as the pairings of 'right' and 'wrong' items within a list. In a typical verbal-discrimination task, the subject is successively presented pairs of verbal items and must learn which member of each pair has been arbitrarily designated as correct by the experimenter; the pairing of items is constant, but the positions of an item within the pair and of a pair within the list vary from trial to trial. According to the frequency theory of verbal-discrimination learning (Ekstrand, Wallace, and Underwood, 1966), the subject performs this task by discriminating between the subjective frequencies accrued to the 'correct' and 'incorrect' members of each pair in the experimental setting. An item gains frequency increments as a consequence of being seen, given as an overt response, or covertly rehearsed. Correct items build up frequency faster than incorrect items, and the subject comes to be able to respond without error by applying this strategy to all pairs: 'Choose the member with the greater subjective frequency.' If the frequency theory is correct and the subject indeed discriminates between the subjective frequencies elicited by the two members of the pair, rather than between, say, any semantic properties of the words

Pronunciation in Verbal-Discrimination Learning and Transfer

The experimental subjects were asked to pronounce both R and W items, or only R items, during the test trials on acquisition of list 1; these W items then appeared with new R items on list 2. Pronouncing both items did not significantly affect list 1 performance, but it did increase positive transfer early in practice-and delay negative transfer later in practice--on list 2. A basic assumption of the frequency theory of verbal-discrimination learning (Ekstrand, Wallace, and Underwood, 1966) is that the cue for discrimination is based on the relative frequency of responding to the right (R) and wrong (W) items in the list. The theory assumes that frequency units are added to an item whenever subjects perceive, pronounce, or rehearse an item during practice, and furthermore, that at least a 2:1 frequency difference in favor of the R items occurs when standard methods are used. As an example, the exposure of a single verbal-discrimination pair (involving an R and a W item) is assumed to add a 'frequency unit' to each item, with the R item receiving additional frequency units during the feedback exposure and whenever a rehearsal of the R item occurs. The theory also implies that discrimination learning will be retarded under any conditions that restrict the development of frequency differences among R and W items. A number of studies (Underwood and Freund, 1968; Goulet and Hoyer, 1969) have been concerned with this issue and have manipulated frequency differences in single-list acquisition by varying pronunciation requirements. Underwood and Freund employed separate study and test trials with pronunciation of both the R and W items on the study trials. Goulet and Hoyer used the anticipation procedure and required subjects to pronounce both items during the feedback exposure. The results of both studies indicated inferior performance when subjects pronounce the R and W items relative to a control where no pronunciation is required. The deleterious effect of such procedures may be attributed to two

Overt/Covert Pronunciation and Rehearsal in Verbal-Discrimination Learning

The frequency theory of verbal-discrimination learning holds that subjects discriminate the right item from the wrong item of a pair on the basis of the differential subjective experience of the frequency of the two items (Ekstrand, Wallace, and Underwood, 1966). Ekstrand et al. assumed, as a working hypothesis, that qualitative differences do not exist in the sources of frequency units (that is, in representational responses, pronunciational responses, or rehearsals of the correct responses) with regard to their contribution to the differential-frequency cue. The present study explored the additional assumption, implicit in the literature, that differences do not exist in the saliency of a frequency unit as a function of whether the subject's mode of response for a pronunciation or a rehearsal response is covert or overt. In the typical anticipation method, the subject indicates his selection during the anticipation interval by pronouncing aloud the item he has chosen. In the feedback interval, the pair reappears with the correct item underlined. Frequency theory assumes that the subject then covertly rehearses this 'right' item at least once during the feedback interval. Some studies (Ekstrand et al., 1966), however, have used a procedure whereby the overt pronunciation is eliminated; others (Kausler and Sardello, 1967) have required an overt rehearsal. Whether a covert pronunciation results in the same increment to the frequency cue as an overt one, and whether a covert rehearsal equals an overt one, has not been determined. The present study was directed toward these questions as well to the matter of whether overt/covert pronunciations produce the same effects as overt/covert rehearsals. A free-recall measure

Discrimination learning of pictures and words

A verbal discrimination (VD) study-test procedure was used to compare discrimination learning of 14 pairs of pictures, concrete nouns, and abstract nouns. Pictures were significantly easier to discriminate than concrete nouns, which in turn produced significantly fewer errors than abstract noun pairs. The results were attributed to the relative image-arousing capacity of the three types of items, and implications for the frequency theory of VD learning were discussed.

Verbal-discrimination learning and transfer with verbal and pictorial materials

Groups of fourth-grade children learned a six-pair discrimination list involving either word or picture materials, followed by discrimination-reversal transfer lists consisting of either picture-equivalent or word-equivalent pairs. The words lists were easier than picture lists in acquistion. On List 2, positive transfer was found on the initial practice trials, with an inhibitory (negative transfer) effect apparent on later trials. The transfer data were in direct accord with predictions generated from the frequency theory of verbal-discrimination learning and support the extension of the theory to discrimination tasks involving nonverbal materials. Transfer functions were highly similar whether the class of materials was the same (Word-Word or Picture-Picture) or was changed (Word-Picture or Picture-Word) on Lists 1 and 2.

Taxonomic Instances as Right or Wrong Items and Selection Strategies in Verbal-Discrimination Learning

Instances of a single taxonomic category served as either the right (R) or wrong (W) items of a verbal-discrimination list. Relative to a control condition having unrelated items on the list, learning was markedly accelerated when the instances were R items, but it was only slightly accelerated when the instances were W items. Additional evidence provided by the free recall of R and W items supported the conclusion that a general selection strategy mediated the verbal-discrimination learning only when the positive instances defining class membership occurred as R items. According to the frequency theory of verbal-discrimination learning, intrapair discriminations between wrong (W) and right (R) items are based on the rote accrual, during practice, of a greater response frequency to R items than to W items, and on the subsequent selection of intrapair items with the greater frequency (Rule 1 of frequency theory).' However, the rote accrual of response frequencies as a prerequisite for intrapair discriminations may be largely abrogated by the activation of a general selection strategy. A selection strategy is likely to be activated whenever the list is structured such that either the R items or the W items are members of a discriminable class. Selection of R items may then be made on the basis of class membership alone (i.e., choosing or avoiding class instances, contingent upon the W-R locus of the class). The efficacy of a selection strategy in mediating verbal-discrimination learning was demonstrated previously, by Kausler and Farzanegan, for lists in which preexperimental word frequency provides the attribute for class membership.2 The present study tested further the efficacy of a Received for publication April 22, 1970. The authors wish to thank Sylvia Kollasch for her assistance in data collection and analysis. 1 B. R. Ekstrand, W. P. Wallace, and B. J. Underwood, A frequency theory of verbal-discrimination learning, Psychol. Rev., 73, 1966, 566-578. 2 D. H. Kausler and F. Farzanegan, Word frequency and selection strategies in verbal-discrimination learning, J. verb. Learn. verb. Behav., 8, 1969, 196-201.

Correction Procedures in Three-Alternative Verbal-Discrimination Lists with Intertriad Associations

Intertriad associative relationships were varied in three-alternative verbal-discrimination lists, using either specific correction (the word itself) or outcome correction ('right,' 'wrong'). All of the associative lists were learned faster with outcome-correction feedback than was the control list, in which there were no interpair associates (NA list); but with specificcorrection feedback, only the list in which both associates were right (AR list) was learned faster. The facilitation with outcome correction is attributed to a change in the chance level of guessing for the lists in which both associates were wrong (AW list) or in which the associates were both right and wrong in different pairs (AB list), and to a summation of rehearsal and implicit response in the AR list. The failure to find interference with specific correction for the AW and AB lists seemed to be a result of the ceiling effect that occurred because of the slow presentation rates. Verbal-discrimination learning has recently been explained in term of the subject's ability to distinguish between the past frequency of experience of the right (R) and wrong (W) members of each pair.1 It was assumed that these differences in experience were acquired through four types of events which contributed one 'frequency unit' each time they occurred during the course of learning. These events were the act of perceiving an item, or the representational response; the choice or pronunciation response during anticipation; the rehearsal of the correct response during the feedback interval; and the implicit associative response. The rehearsal response was seen as the event initially shifting the frequency of experience in favor of the R term, because the representational and Received for publication May 18, 1970. The investigation was supported by Biomedical Sciences Support Grant Fr-07053 from the General Research Support Branch, Division of Research Resources, Bureau of Health Professions Education and Manpower Training, National Institutes of Health. 1 B. R. Ekstrand, W. P. Wallace, and B. J. Underwood, A frequency theory of verbal-discrimination learning, Psychol. Rev., 73, 1966, 566-578.

Number of alternatives and similarity in verbal-discrimination learning

Lists of 16 two-alternative (2-A) or four-alternative (4-A) verbal-discrimination items of either low similarity (LS), high within-item similarity (WIS), or high between-item similarity (BIS) were learned by 144 S s. When biases that favored 2-A lists were removed, fewer errors occurred in learning 4-A lists than 2-A lists. More errors occurred in BIS than LS lists with WIS producing an intermediate number of errors. Recognition and recall measures taken after learning revealed better retention of incorrect alternatives from 2-A lists than from 4-A lists, and better retention of WIS items than of BIS or LS items. The results were interpreted in terms of a frequency theory of verbal-discrimination learning.

The effects of verbalization on verbal discrimination learning and associative recall in young children and adults

Groups of fifth-grade and college Ss learned a verbal-discrimination list consisting of 12-paired high-frequency words. The lists were learned under conditions where Ss were or were not instructed to pronounce the right and wrong items during the feedback exposure period. Following acquisition, Ss were given eight trials involving recall of Right-Wrong and Wrong-Right associations. Rate of acquisition was directly related to age and pronunciation during acquisition hindered learning for both fifth-grade and college Ss. Associative recall of both W-R and R-W associations was facilitated under the pronunciation treatment. However, W-R recall was greater than R-W recall for the college Ss, with the reverse being true for the fifth-grade Ss. The results were discussed in relation to the frequency theory of verbal-discrimination learning.

First-trial guessing and verbal-discrimination learning

Several sets of data from verbal-discrimination learning experiments were analyzed to determine if guessing right or wrong on Trial 1 affected performance on the following trials. In some analyses, correct guessing facilitated subsequent performance. The results were related to a frequency theory of verbal-discrimination learning.

A frequency theory of verbal-discrimination learning.

A frequency theory of verbal-discrimination learning.

Important vegetable acids from benzene : Amer. Chem. Soc. News Service, Bulletin 252

Groups of fifth-grade and college Ss learned a verbal-discrimination list consisting of 12-paired high-frequency words. The lists were learned under conditions where Ss were or were not instructed to pronounce the right and wrong items during the feedback exposure period. Following acquisition, Ss were given eight trials involving recall of Right-Wrong and Wrong-Right associations.Rate of acquisition was directly related to age and pronunciation during acquisition hindered learning for both fifth-grade and college Ss. Associative recall of both W-R and R-W associations was facilitated under the pronunciation treatment. However, W-R recall was greater than R-W recall for the college Ss, with the reverse being true for the fifth-grade Ss. The results were discussed in relation to the frequency theory of verbal-discrimination learning.