Retention was examined for an event that was experienced either directly or indirectly. In the first experiment, subjects witnessed a staged event in their classroom involving an argument between two students concerning ownership of a textbook. Subjects in a second study indirectly experienced the event as they heard an account of the book dispute. Immediately following the episode and 2 weeks later both a free-recall test and recognition questionnaire were administered. In free-recall those who witnessed the event remembered nearly as much on the delayed test as they had on the immediate task. For the auditory modality, however, a greater decrement in recall over the retention interval was observed. A similar pattern of results was found in recognition. Additional analyses indicated that actions were retained better than conversation and physical description, and suggested that the type of experience influences how well these aspects of the event are remembered. Interpretations of the overall findings are offered within the context of dual-coding theory and in terms of modality differences in both encoding elaboration and selective attention.What eyewitnesses remember about events and the people involved in them has received increasing attention in recent years, both by cognitive and social psychologists. A variety of methodologies have been employed in the study of event memory. F o r example, Buckhout and his colleagues (e.g. Buckhout, Alper, Chern, Silverberg and Slomovits, 1974;Buckhout, Figueroa and Hoff, 1975) were among the first to adopt the technique of examining eyewitness reports by staging events. Loftus and her associates (Loftus, 1975;Loftus, Altman and Geballe, 1975;Loftus, Miller, and Burns, 1978;Loftus and Palmer, 1974;Loftus and Zanni, 1975;Tousignant, Hall, and Loftus, 1986) have systematically examined the accuracy of eyewitness reports concerning episodes that were presented in a film, videotape, or slide show. Eyewitness accuracy has also been studied in field settings to avoid constraints on realism prossibly present in laboratory studies (e.g. Brigham, Maass, Snyder and Spaulding, 1982;Yuille and Cutshall, 1986). For example, Yuille and Cutshall (1986) were able to interview witnesses to an actual gun-shooting incident 4 5 months after police interviews.Regardless of methodology and modality of experience, eyewitness reports are usually far from accurate (Buckhout, 1974; Ceci, Toglia and Ross,

Sixty-four subjects participated in three experiments which examined the relative instructional effectiveness of using small group CBT. For experiments 1 and 3, twelve subjects were assigned to either a group training condition (4 per terminal) or an individual training condition (1 per terminal). Eight subjects were assigned to one of the two training conditions in Experiment 2. The group training subjects consistently completed the courseware more quickly and with less difficulty than did the individual training condition subjects. Also, the group training subjects' learning was shown to be more resistant to forgetting. Finally, cooperative learning was prevalent with the group training subjects. This investigation thus documented the relative instructional efficiency of small group CBT for a procedural learning task.

No abstract