The effects of effort toward comprehension on recall

Abstract

Four experiments examined free recall of generally incomprehensible sentences with appropriate cues that made the sentences comprehensible. A distinction is made between processes involved in an effort toward comprehension and elaboration processes that occur following comprehension. It was found that providing additional time for effort toward comprehension enhanced recall, while providing additional time for elaboration following comprehension did not enhance recall. It was also shown that the effects of effort toward comprehension were contingent upon eventual understanding of the sentence.The present experiments were designed to extend previous research on the effect of comprehending a stimulus and to clarify the effects of elaboration of a stimulus in relation to comprehension. The question to be addressed is whether the effects of elaboration are contingent on where or how comprehension occurs.Several studies have shown the importance for later recall of comprehending a stimulus. For example, Marks and Miller (1964) and Schulman (1974) showed that meaningful stimuli are better recalled than nonsensical stimuli. It was also demonstrated by Bransford and Johnson (1972) and Bransford and McCarrell (1974) that even potentially meaningful stimuli are better recalled in the presence of appropriate contextual information. Johnson, Doll, Bransford, and Lapinski (1974) showed that generally incomprehensible sentences were recalled less well if subjects received an inappropriate context or no context than if they received appropriate contexts.

The effects of "effort after meaning" on recall: Differences in within- and between-subjects designs

“…The terms effort after meaning (Bartlett, 1932) and effort toward comprehension (Auble & Franks, 1978) suggest that some form of cognitive effort is involved in attempting to understand a to-be-learned stimulus and that this effortful process directly influences retention. If so, what is the exact nature of this effort, and what factors influence the amount and quality of effort devoted to stimulus comprehension?…”

“…On a general level, due to the active or synthetic nature of comprehension, effort after meaning appears to be an active process. More specifically, the Auble and Franks (1978) paradigm is similar to generation tasks that require subjects to solve verbal or mathematical problems, as opposed to passively receiving the solutions (Crutcher & Healy, 1989;Erdelyi, Buschke, & Finkelstein, 1977;Jacoby, 1978). The purpose of the present research is to shed light on the processes underlying the memorial advantage of effort after meaning by asking whether the same variables that modulate generation effects will also determine the effects of effort after meaning in the Auble and Franks paradigm.…”

“…In other conditions, the sentence preceded the cue. In four experiments, we examined free recall of ambiguous sentences with or without corresponding cues to facilitate comprehension, using Auble and Franks's (1978) paradigm to examine effort after meaning (Bartlett, 1932). The ambiguous sentences were studied without cues, with cues meaningfully embedded in them, with cues provided shortly before the sentence (precue), or with cues following the sentence after several seconds (delayed cue).…”

“…(p. 44) In experiencing the world, humans presumably bring their past knowledge to bear on understanding current happenings. When it comes to remembering past occurrences, Bartlett argued that people attempt to make their recollections conform to cultural expectations, prior background knowledge, or the current context.To directly examine effort after meaning as it relates to memory, Auble and Franks (1978) developed an ingenious experimental paradigm in which subjects heard and later attempted to recall ambiguous sentences, such as "The clothes were ruined because the sign vanished," that were presented with or without disambiguating cues (i.e., wet paint). Where cues were provided, their conditions of presentation varied.…”

“…To directly examine effort after meaning as it relates to memory, Auble and Franks (1978) developed an ingenious experimental paradigm in which subjects heard and later attempted to recall ambiguous sentences, such as "The clothes were ruined because the sign vanished," that were presented with or without disambiguating cues (i.e., wet paint). Where cues were provided, their conditions of presentation varied.…”