Pronunciation and the length of the study interval in verbal discrimination.

Hopkins, Ronald H.; Epling, W. Frank

doi:10.1037/h0030650

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are some difficulties in interpreting the effects of this variable because overt study groups were forced to pronounce both alternatives once as each pair was presented. It is known that decrements in VDL are produced by such pronunciation requirements (e.g., Hopkins & Epling, 1971;Underwood & Freund, 1968), and whether any additional decrement is due to overt study per se cannot be determined from the present experiments.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 75%

“…Forced pronunciation during VDL study trials was used in the present experiments to manipulate frequency discrimination. This variable is known to influence VDL, and the effect is generally interpreted in terms of frequency theory (Hopkins & Epling, 1971;Smith & Jensen, 1971;Underwood & Freund, 1968). The present experiments differ from Rowe's (1972a) Experiment I in methodological details, by inclusion of pronouncing conditions in the present study designed to impair VDL, and by the addition of a frequency rating task subsequent to VDL.…”

Section: Experiments V and Vimentioning

confidence: 67%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Imagery and frequency in verbal discrimination learning.

Wallace¹,

Murphy²,

Sawyer³

1973

Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 75%

Section: Experiments V and Vimentioning

confidence: 67%

Imagery and frequency in verbal discrimination learning.

Wallace¹,

Murphy²,

Sawyer³

1973

Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Certain independent variables, such as the imagery level of items, which are known to have potent effects on verbal discrimination learning (e.g., Rowe & Cake, 1974), seemingly affect intrapair discriminations through the variation they produce in the elaborative rehearsal of right items. On the other hand, other independent variables, such as the overt pronunciation of items (e.g., Hopkins & Epling, 1971), seemingly exert their effects through the variation they produce in the frequency values of right and wrong items, thus modifying intrapair frequency differences.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Item identification following varying presentations of pairs on a heterogeneous multiple-item recognition learning task.

Kausler¹,

Dalezman²,

Yadrick³

1978

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sets of pairs for a multiple-item recognition (verbal discrimination) learning task varied in their number of presentations during a single extended study trial. The test phase required old-new and right-wrong (functional) identifications of individual items. Old-item identification increased with increasing exposure for both right and wrong items. However, an increase in functional identification with increasing exposures occurred for right items but not for wrong items. This pattern of results suggests that identifications of prior wrong items are mediated by frequency cues alone, whereas identifications of right items are supplemented by nonfrequency cues that are associated with right items through their elaborative rehearsal during the study phase.The ability of subjects to identify both the oldness and the prior function (i.e., whether they are right or wrong) of individual items following study trials on a multiple-item recognition, or verbal discrimination, task has been demonstrated in several recent studies (e.g., Kausler, Pavur, & Yadrick, 1975;Kausler & Yadrick, 1977). The means by which response-based frequency units may mediate such identifications have been described by Kausler et al. (1975) in terms of a signal detection model. Briefly, separate distributions of frequency units are presumed to be generated for right and wrong items during practice. Although these distributions are expected to be partially overlapping, the mean of the right-item distribution should exceed the mean of the wrong-item distribution, beginning with the first study trial (see Figure 1). The disparity between distributions is attribut-

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, rather definitive effects for pronunciation have been isolated. For example, when the pronunciation of both wrong and right members is compared to no pronunciation in feedback, acquisition has consistently been found to be impeded as a function of the pronunciation (Carmean & Weir, 1967;Goulet & Hoyer, 1969;Hopkins & Epling, 1971;Rowe & Paivio, 1972;Underwood & Freund, 1968b, Experiment II). Using a slightly different procedure Weir and Helgoe (1968) also found acquisition to be retarded relative to a nonpronouncing group when pronunciation of wrong and right members occurred randomly an equal number of times per item.…”

Section: Verbalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Verbal discrimination learning: A review of the acquisition, transfer, and retention literature through 1972.

Eckert¹,

Kanak²

1974

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The literature pertaining to verbal discrimination acquisition, transfer, and retention is reviewed. Integrated into the review of these data are discussions of frequency theory, extensions to the frequency theory, and hypotheses independent of the frequency theory. It is generally concluded that the frequency theory is suitable for the explanation and prediction of data in experiments which require only recognition memory and that other theoretical accounts or extensions are needed to predict and explain verbal discrimination problems which require processes other than simple recognition memory.

show abstract

Pronunciation and the length of the study interval in verbal discrimination.

Cited by 11 publications

References 5 publications

Imagery and frequency in verbal discrimination learning.

Imagery and frequency in verbal discrimination learning.

Item identification following varying presentations of pairs on a heterogeneous multiple-item recognition learning task.

Verbal discrimination learning: A review of the acquisition, transfer, and retention literature through 1972.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About