The Measurement of Personality 1976
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-011-6168-8_50
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Extraversion, Arousal, and Paired-Associate Recall

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

6
34
0

Year Published

1977
1977
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
6
34
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This is due to better consolidation processes over time of the materials learned (`Kleinsmith effect'; Kaplan, 1963, 1964). Though these studies have used very simple materials (nonsense syllables or word-digit pairs), much shorter retention intervals (up to 1 week), and an arousal level that was induced rather than used as an individual difference characteristic as here (but see Howarth and Eysenck, 1968), and their results not always replicated (see Keppel's, 1984, review), the trends obtained are quite similar.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 58%
“…This is due to better consolidation processes over time of the materials learned (`Kleinsmith effect'; Kaplan, 1963, 1964). Though these studies have used very simple materials (nonsense syllables or word-digit pairs), much shorter retention intervals (up to 1 week), and an arousal level that was induced rather than used as an individual difference characteristic as here (but see Howarth and Eysenck, 1968), and their results not always replicated (see Keppel's, 1984, review), the trends obtained are quite similar.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 58%
“…For example, stimulus insensitive individuals or stimulus screeners were reported as more likely to approach and affiliate with more arousing settings (Aron, 2004;Mehrabian, 1995;Russell & Mehrabian, 1978;Schwerdtfeger, 2007). Similarly, extraversion was found to be linked with stimulus-seeking behaviors (Eysenck, 1981;Eysenck & Zuckerman, 1978;Howarth & Eysenck, 1968;Strelau & Eysenck, 1987). Given the design of this study we were able to test whether individual differences in stimulus sensitivity, noise sensitivity and extraversion were associated with our objective measures of home chaos.…”
Section: Hypothesis 1: Relation Between Observed and Perceived Measurmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…The findings from memory experiments, where extraverts show better retrieval at short retention intervals. and introverts better at long, have been interpeted to mean that more sustained post-processing, interfering with short-term retrieval but facilitating long-term retention, takes place in introverts (Howarth & Eysenck, 1968). A more distinct phase of perceptual closure in extraverts, accompanied by transient inhibition, is compatible with earlier findings of extraverts having lower critical flicker fusion thresholds (Simonson & Brozek, 1952), shorter duration of aftereffects (Levy & Lang, 1966), and more involuntary rest pauses in a tapping task (Eysenck, 1964).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%