No abstract

Retarded, normal, and superior Ss used whole-, pure-parts, and progressive-parts methods in learning CVC trigram-numeral pairs. Groups equated for MA did not differ in rote learning; groups equated for CA did differ: the superior group exceeded the others and the normal group exceeded the retarded. The groups did not react differentially to the three methods. In all groups, Ss using the whole-method responded most adequately while those using the pure- and progressive-parts-methods responded with similar adequacy to the learning task.

No abstract

No abstract

Retarded, normal, and superior Ss were compared on their grouping object-level words by criteria at two levels of inclusiveness. With MA held constant, the groups did not differ in level of concept attainment. With CA held constant, the groups did differ: the superior exceeded the retarded and normal; and the normal exceeded the retarded. The groups did nor respond differentially to rhe two levels of inclusiveness; and so, relationships between the groups remained constam at both levels.