Study-test Method Research Articles

Context effects in the initial storage and retrieval of noun pairs

An experiment was performed to determine the loci at which sentence contexts facilitate PA learning. The task given to 208 fifth- and sixth-grade children was that of learning 14 pairs of high-frequency nouns by a one-trial, study-test method. The principal independent variables were: the locus of presentation of the verbal context (study trial vs. test trial vs. both); and, the type of context (conjunction phrase vs. simple declarative sentence). For an outside control group, verbal context was not provided on the study trial nor on the test trial. In comparison with the control group, facilitation was produced only by sentence contexts and only when such contexts were provided during the study trial. The magnitude of facilitation was greater when the sentences were presented on both the study and test trials than when presented during the study trial alone. A mediation hypothesis is offered to account for the results.

Stimulus recognition in aural paired-associate learning

Aural paired-associates were learned by the study-test method. On test trials, the study-trials stimuli were randomly intermixed among new stimuli and the Ss, prior to responding, had to indicate whether the presented stimulus was old or new. It was found that correct responding was contingent upon stimulus recognition, and that correct responding given nonrecognition of the stimulus was at the chance level.

Study-Test and Anticipation Methods in Paired-Associate Learning of Similar and Non-Similar Lists

The purposes of the present study were to compare the study-test and anticipation procedures and to investigate the effect of high intralist similarity upon learning by each method. Forty Ss, 24 females and 16 males, learned one list by each method. The results indicate that the study-test method leads to better performance, as measured by number of trials to criterion. The detrimental effect of high intralist similarity was significant only for the study-test method. This finding is contrary to the results reported by other investigators.

Natural language mediators in paired associate learning

Ss learned paired CVCs using a modified study-test method. After presentation of pairs, two tests were given, where the second questioned about any natural language mediators (NLMs) Ss used to learn pairs. NLMs played an important role in learning correct responses. In addition, after the first correct recall items learned using NLMs were more often correct on later trials than those without NLMs.

Aural paired-associate learning: Stimulus familiarization, response familiarization, and pronunciability

Summary The present investigation was concerned with the effect on subsequent verbal paired-associate (PA) learning of prior familiarization with stimulus or response trigrams which represented the entire range of rated ease of pronunciability. Materials were presented aurally by means of a tape recorder during both familiarization and PA learning. Three groups of 60 S s were given 0, 30 relevant or 30 irrelevant trigram familiarization trials during which they listened silently as E spelled the appropriate set of 8 trigrams at a 2-sec rate. Following familiarization, half the S s in each group learned an 8-item trigram-number list (stimulus familiarization conditions), the other half learned a number-trigram list (response familiarization conditions). These lists were learned by the study-test method. In terms of the mean number of correct responses over the 15 PA test trials, the following were the main results: (1) Stimulus-term familiarization, whether it was relevant or irrelevant, facilitated PA performance to an equal degree and did not interact with level of pronunciability. (2) When applied to response terms, both types of familiarization facilitated PA performance, but the amount of facilitation was greater with relevant than with irrelevant familiarization. (3) The facilitation produced by relevant response-term familiarization decreased as the pronunciability of the trigrams increased; however, the nonspecific effect of irrelevant familiarization was not related to pronunciability. (4) Under all conditions, PA performance was directly related to ease of trigram pronunciability.

The Test-Study Method versus the Study-Test Method in Teaching Spelling

Previous articleNext article FreeThe Test-Study Method versus the Study-Test Method in Teaching SpellingL. R. KilzerL. R. Kilzer Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Volume 34, Number 7Sep., 1926 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/438375 Views: 18 Citations: 1Citations are reported from Crossref Journal History This article was published in The School Review (1893-1979), which is continued by the American Journal of Education (1979-present). PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Steven C. Pan, Timothy C. Rickard, Robert A. Bjork Does Spelling Still Matter—and If So, How Should It Be Taught? Perspectives from Contemporary and Historical Research, Educational Psychology Review 33, no.44 (Mar 2021): 1523–1552.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09611-y