Verbal-discrimination learning following a free-recall familiarization training procedure.

Abstract

The effects of transfer from a modified free-recall task to verbal-discrimination (VD) learning were investigated. The free-recall procedure was designed to impart increments in experimental frequency to specific words that appeared in VD. Four experimental groups were given prior free-recall exposure to either all right VD items (A-H), all wrong (A-w), both the right and wrong items from same VD pairs (B-S), or both die right and wrong items from different VD pairs (B-D). A fifth group served as a control and learned a free-recall list which did not contain any VD items (c). In terms of number of correct responses during VD learning, the groups were ordered as follows: A-R, c, A-W, B-S, and B-D. The results were interpreted as being consistent with derivations from die frequency theory of VD learning.

Verbal-discrimination learning: Familiarization of common and uncommon words.

“…Consistent with the findings of Berkowitz (1968) and Wallace and Nappe (1970), the prediction from frequency theory that familiarization will slow VD learning received support. Such detrimental effects were much less apparent for VD lists of words of very low language frequency than for lists of common words.…”

“…Given some existing frequencies at the outset, a greater number of VD trials are required to reach this ratio. This notion, resembling a Weber's constant, has been supported in some studies (e.g., Berkowitz, 1968;Wallace & Nappe, 1970) but not in others (e.g., Runquist & Freeman, 1960). Lovelace (1969) reported significantly better performance on a VD list of words of very low language frequency when three familiarization trials were given on each word prior to VD learning than when irrelevant familiarization on digits preceded the VD task.…”

Verbal discrimination learning as a function of percentage occurrence of reinforcing information (% ORI) and varying presentation rates.

“…Further support for frequency theory has come from studies in which transfer paradigms were used (Raskin, Boice, Rubel, & Clark, 1968;Smith & Jensen, 1971;Underwood, Jesse, & Ekstrand, 1964;Wallace & Nappe, 1970). Underwood et al changed either the correct or incorrect words from VD List 1 to List 2, while Raskin et al changed or maintained the correct and incorrect designation of words in two successive lists.…”

Re-pairing "rights" and "wrongs" in verbal discrimination learning.

“…The second major point emphasized here is that when all pairs in a list are not uniform with regard to the "rule" that correct alternatives surpass their respective incorrect alternatives in frequency value, VD learning is difficult. It has been demonstrated that VD lists structured to approximate this condition are, indeed, very difficult (Ekstrand et al, 1966;Wallace & Nappe, 1970).…”