Retention Of Paired Associates Research Articles

Memory relationships between MRI volumes and resting PET metabolism of medial temporal lobe structures

Prior studies of temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) patients showed that MRI volumes and resting PET scan measures of temporal lobe structures were related to memory. Weintrob and colleagues [Ann. Neurol. 2002;51:442–7] reported that PET glucose uptake in the left perirhinal cortex predicted verbal paired associate (PA) learning, whereas MRI volume of the left hippocampus did not. We investigated whether MRI volumes could account for memory functioning if both PET and volumes were from the same region in 18 TLE patients. Volumes and glucose uptake of the hippocampus and parahippocampal gyrus (PHG) were compared with WMS-III performance. Significant correlations were observed between hippocampal volumes and PA and Logical Memory (LM) Percent Retention, but not between memory and PHG volumes or any PET measures. Multiple regression revealed that hippocampal volumes, but not PHG volumes or PET, significantly predicted PA and LM retention scores. These findings suggest that hippocampal volumes provide unique information regarding memory.

Levels of Processing and the Retention of Paired-Associates

The effect of self-reference, semantic, and rote processing on the retention of paired-associates was examined at intervals of 5 min. and 2 wk. 25 subjects per group were given 120 sec. to process each of 15 paired-associates by self-reference, semantic, or rote. The pairs were a low meaningful nonsense word and a high meaningful English noun. At both retention intervals, self-reference and semantic processing produced significantly higher retention than rote processing and there was no difference in retention between self-reference and semantic processing. The results were compared with those of similar studies.

Rules and Paired-Associate Retention

The present study sought to determine whether the superior retention enjoyed by lists with rules is a function of superior storage of individual pairs or superior retrieval resulting from the reduction in response-set size. Fifty-four students participated as a requirement for introductory psychology. They were randomly assigned to conditions and individually tested. A retroactive inhibition design was used with all lists made up of 12 CVC word pairs. Each student learned one of t h e e first lists. For two of the lists a general rule applied, either each pair rhymed, e.g., PAN-FAN, or changed middle letter, e.g., PAN-PIN. The third list consisted of unrelated pairs, e.g., PAN-WIG. Stimuli in the three lists were the same and responses were similar in ThorndikeLorge frequency. Anticipation learning at 2:2-sec. rate with a 4-sec. intertrial interval was taken to 7/12 correct. Three different orders of the pairs were used, and all lists had the same sequence of orders. subjects were informed of the rule applying to their list. All subjects received 12 anticipation trials on a common second list of unrelated pairs, containing the first list stimuli and responses unrelated to those in the first lists. There followed a test of retention of the first list in which the entire set of stimuli was presented on a sheet of paper. Half the subjects had to recall each response and half had to select it from two alternatives, both of which followed the rule for the rule lists or were unrelated for the unrelated list. Mean crials to first-list criterion were 3.44 (middle-letter change), 5.33 (rhyme), and 9.78 (unrelated). These means were significantly different (P2,51 = 19.66, p < .01). Number of responses recalled yielded a significant F2.24 of 13.13 ( 9 < .01). The means were 10.00 (middle-letter change), 9.22 (rhyme), and 5.44 (unrelated). Little difference was observed in recognition, with means ranging from 11.33 ro 12.00. These results support the response-restriction hypothesis which maintains that rules are beneficial to the extent that they restrict the number of possible responses to the stimulus. In first list learning and in recall rules did indeed prove helpful, with the more restrictive rule (middle-letter change) proving most effective. As expected, rules were not helpful in recognition. Since both alternatives satisfied the rule, response-set size was the same for all. W e may conclude, then, that rules aid retrieval by response restriction rather than storage of individual pairs. This conclusion can only be tentative, however, for the negligible difference obtained among means for recognition may have been imposed by a ceiling effect. Accepted December 17, 1981. '

Picture-word differences in the acquisition and retention of paired associates.

Picture-word differences in the acquisition and retention of paired associates.

Picture-word differences in the acquisition and retention of paired associates.

In a study of paired-associate learning and retention, the mode of presentation (pictures versus words) of the stimuli and the responses was varied factorially. The numbers of acquisition trials were adjusted to control degree of learning, and recall was tested 1 week after the end of acquisition. Learning was substantially retarded when pictures rather than words were used as responses. Rate of improvement over trials was faster with pictorial than with verbal stimuli, but these effects were less pronounced than those on the response side. The differences in long-term retention were relatively small. The stimulus mode had no effect; the picture-response ggroups showed some advantage over the word-response groups. Some of the results pose difficulties for current interpretations of picture--word differences.

Retention of paired associates as a function of list length.

Retention of paired associates as a function of list length.

Study position and item differences in the short- and long-term retention of paired associates learned by imagery

Twenty-four Ss studied a list of 96 concrete noun paired associates with instructions to image each pair in an interactive scene. Recall tests were administered immediately following study, and one week later. Recall on the initial test improved as the position of the nounpair in the study list increased, but recall a week later was inversely related to study position. Analyses of item differences suggested that if an image is not immediately remembered during test, information derivable from the stimulus cue can serve to facilitate recall.

Acoustic similarity effects on memory for paired associates

Experiment I tested the short-term retention of paired associates (PAs) with 6-item PA lists and a probe technique. Acoustic similarity between the left-hand members (e.g., LAMPRAMP) of specific pairs increased proactive inhibition but not retroactive inhibition (RI). Experiment II, which used the same kind of materials, examined RI in memory for PAs following multi-trial practice on two consecutive PA lists. Acoustic similarity had no substantial effect on retention of the first list or learning of the second list. These data suggest that, in short-term retention at least, acoustic similarity effects on the memory for PAs are mostly proactive.

Unit-sequence facilitation in recall

This study investigated the influence of pre-experimental associative habits on the retention of paired associates. The learning materials were mixed lists of 15 paired associates comprising five pairs each of strong associates, crossed associates, and unrelated words (S, Cr, and U pairs). For the S pairs there was a normative connection of high strength between the stimulus and the response. The Cr pairs consisted of inappropriately paired members of strongly associated pairs. There were no known normative connections between the members of U pairs. There were three groups receiving different numbers of acquisition trials (two, six and ten, respectively) chosen so as to yield approximately equal degrees of learning on the three types of pairs. Retention was tested 48 hrs after the end of learning. Comparisons were made among the critical pairs which determined the number of learning trials given to each group. Recall of the S pairs was substantially higher than that of the U and Cr pairs. The Cr pairs tended to be recalled better than the U pairs. The results provide evidence for positive effects on retention of pre-experimental associative habits and of response availability.

Effects of post-learning activities on the retention of paired-associates

The effects of four different post-learning activities on the retention of 10 low-high meaningful paired-associate items were examined. Retention measures were collected after seven days. Ss receiving post-learning activities had significantly higher mean retention scores than Ss not receiving such treatment. It was also found that retention scores were related to strategy level employed during learning. The results were discussed in terms of an interaction between intention to learn, the development of better plans to aid recall during post-learning activities, and an over-learning effect.

Effect of response probability on acquisition and retention of paired associates with varying stimulus frequency: Confirmatory results

Forty male schizophrenics learned a paired-associate list in which stimulus frequency and response probability were varied to a criterion of two perfect trials. After an interval of 14–17 days, retention was tested by aided recall. Results indicated that performance was poorest, at least in retention ( p

The influence of contextual cues upon the learning and retention of paired associates.

The influence of contextual cues upon the learning and retention of paired associates.

Effects of reporting associative strategies on the retention of paired-associates

The present study examined the effects on long term retention of reporting associative strategies after learning. Ss learned 10 L-H paired associate items to a criterion of two perfect, consecutive trials per item. Retention measures were collected after 20 min., 48 hr. and 7 days. Ss reporting associative strategies had higher retention scores than those not reporting such mediational links, and this superiority increased with increments in the delay interval. The results were discussed in terms of an overlearning—postorganizer paradigm.

Retroactive and proactive inhibition in the short-term retention of paired associates

This study investigated whether paradigm of transfer would have the same influence on RI and PI after varying intervals of time in STM as it does in LTM. Two lists, each with 2 pairs of CVC stimuli and word responses, were presented once, followed by number reading. MMFR was given after 6, 22, or 40 sec. Each S was given 3 replications. On Test 1, with positive transfer, List-1 and List-2 recall were equal and Ss did not differ from controls; with negative transfer, PI exceeded RI and Ss recalled significantly less than controls. Recall did not change over time on Test 1. A decrease in recall over tests, a measure of intra-experimental PI, was present and significant.

Effects of within-list and between-list acoustic similarity on the learning and retention of paired associates.

Effects of within-list and between-list acoustic similarity on the learning and retention of paired associates.

Meaningfulness and Retention of a Single Paired Associate

The prediction of interference theory that material of low meaning would be more resistant to forgetting was tested by comparing the retention of paired associates of high and low meaning. Each S learned a single paired associate and was tested once after time intervals ranging from 25 sec. to 2 wk. Contrary to the prediction of interference theory, no statistically significant differences were found at retention.

Facilitation in short- and long-term retention of paired associates following distributed practice in learning

Summary Four experiments tested an hypothesis offered by Underwood, et al. (1962) which states that distributed practice (DP) given during the learning of the last in a series of A-B, A-C, A-D, A-E lists allows for greater extinction of prior associations from the first three lists, resulting in higher retention when the last list is learned under DP than under massed practice (MP). For the first three experiments, DP was administered on the last list and consisted of three 24-hour intervals interpolated between pairs of trials. In Exps. 1 and 1a, the four lists formed an A-C paradigm, while in Exp. 2 the lists formed an A-Br paradigm, where the lists consisted of four successive pairings of stimulus and response terms. In Exp. 1 retention was taken after 1 and 8 days, in Exp. 1a, after 29 days, for DP only, and in Exp. 2, after 8 days. In Exp. 3, the short-term retention of the last in a series of single paired associates, forming an A-B, A-C, etc. paradigm, was studied. Retention was taken either 30 or 90 sec following the final presentation of the last pair; the interval between successive presentations of the last pair was either 4 1/2 sec (MP) or 33 sec (DP). Retention of List 4 after 1 day was 89 and 31% and after 8 days, 72 and 7% for the DP and MP groups, respectively, in Exp. 1; and after 29 days, 34% for the DP group in Exp. 1a. These results indicate marked superiority in the retention of List 4 following learning under DP. In Exp. 2, employing the A-Br paradigm, the DP effect, defined in terms of the difference in retention loss for the DP and MP groups, was 2.58 items, this difference being half that obtained for the same conditions in Exp. 1 for the A-C paradigm (5.11 items). These results required the modification of the theory of Underwood et al. to include the forward and backward associations under conditions of widely spaced DP intervals. In Exp. 3, after both retention intervals, retention was superior for the DP condition. The results of this experiment extend the applicability of the extinction-recovery theory to the short-term retention of single paired associates.

Effect of Meaningful Relation on Learning and Retention of Paired-Associates

Effect of Meaningful Relation on Learning and Retention of Paired-Associates

Retention of paired associates as a function of percentage of occurrence of response members.

(1962). Retention of Paired Associates as a Function of Percentage of Occurrence of Response Members. The Journal of General Psychology: Vol. 66, No. 2, pp. 203-211.

The acquisition and retention of paired associates by good, average, and poor readers.

The acquisition and retention of paired associates by good, average, and poor readers.