Clustering and free recall with alternative organizational cues.

Dolinsky, Richard

doi:10.1037/h0033283

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 7 publications

(16 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Murdock (2008) noted the important Bousfield (1953) data showing that semantically similar items tend to cluster in free recall. The same may be true, albeit to a lesser extent, of items close to one another in phonological space (rhyme-based clustering: Bousfield & Wicklund, 1969;Dolinsky, 1972;although see Forrester & King, 1971). It is also true of items close in temporal distance (Kahana, 1996) and of items studied in similar contexts (Hintzman, Block, & Inskeep, 1972).…”

Section: Similarity Effectsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Serial and free recall: Common effects and common mechanisms? A reply to Murdock (2008).

Brown¹,

Chater²,

Neath³

2008

Psychological Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Does a single mechanism underpin serial and free recall? B. Murdock (2008) argued against the claim, embodied in the SIMPLE model of memory (G. D. A. Brown, I. Neath, & N. Chater, 2007), that data from serial and free recall can be accounted for within a unitary model. Here, the many similarities between serial and free recall are noted, and it is suggested that differences may result not from the use of different mechanisms but from task demands and the involvement of rehearsal processes. Rehearsal has not previously been accommodated by temporal distinctiveness models because of their simplifying assumption that items occupy point locations along a temporal dimension in memory. Here, it is suggested that use of representations that acknowledge items' temporal extension allows the scale-similar temporal distinctiveness approach to account for several additional phenomena that lie outside the scope of other models.

show abstract

Section: Similarity Effectsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Serial and free recall: Common effects and common mechanisms? A reply to Murdock (2008).

Brown¹,

Chater²,

Neath³

2008

Psychological Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Subjects have been shown to have strong preferences for organization based on taxonomic rather than on structural attributes of stimuli. For example, Dolinsky (1972) found little acoustic clustering (clustering of words that rhyme) in free recall when both associative and acoustic bases for clustering were available in the list. Lauer and Battig (1972) and Mondani, Pellegrino, and Battig (1973) found that subjects preferred taxonomic organization over orthographic (initial letter) organization.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The extensive literature on organizational strategies used by hearing people with written or spoken English words as stimuli indicates that subjects typically organize materials on the basis of meaning, rather than on the basis of structural features of stimuli (e.g., Dolinsky, 1972;Lauer & Battig, 1972;Shuell, 1969;Wood, 1970Wood, , 1972. The studies described in the present paper were designed to investigate whether deaf subjects would show a comparable preference for semantic cate- Figure 1.…”

Section: University Ofrochester Rochester New York 14627mentioning

confidence: 99%

Semantic and formational clustering in deaf and hearing subjects’ free recall of signs

1978

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The present experiment used a list construction with both rhyming (shallow) and word-associate ( deep) relationships in the same list (cf. Dolinsky, 1972 anxiety-depth hypothesis suggests that high-anxiety subjects would show a deficit in terms of associative organization, as has been found previously, but no deficit should be observed for acoustic organization. As a methodological point, the method of list presentation was either visual or auditory, to determine whether this had any effect on the perception of the presence of the acoustic relationships.…”

mentioning

confidence: 68%

“…Primarily, it is necessary that the alternative bases for organization be equally potent and obvious to the subjects. While the blocked presentation method was used to alleviate problems in discovering the rhyming relationships, there was still less organization by rhymes than associates (as has been shown before, e.g., Dolinsky, 1972). This suggests that the rhyme basis still was not as potent, as obvious, or as useful as the associative relationships.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Test anxiety, input modality, and levels of organization in free recall

Mueller

1977

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Subjects performed for five trials on a free recall list containing both rhyming word pairs and word-associate pairs, with either visual or auditory presentation. High-anxiety subjects recalled and clustered less than low-anxiety subjects for both rhymes and associates. There was little effect due to input modality, nor did modality interact with anxiety.Recent research has shown that high-anxiety subjects do not perform as well as low-anxiety subjects in free recall (cf. Mueller, 1976). Specifically, although highanxiety subjects may recall as many words, their recall is less organized; for example, there is less clustering of words in terms of intralist relationships such as taxonomic category membership. One interpretation of this deficit is that high-anxiety subjects engage in a more restricted encoding of the items, and thus are less able to utilize various word features to advantage in organizing material in memory.A question of interest concerns the generality of this cue utilization deficit. It has been observed (Broadbent, 1971;Schwartz, 1975) that states of high arousal seem to orient the subject's attention to the physical characteristics of linguistic materials, at the expense of semantic content. One way to conceptualize this is in terms of the depth-of-processing analysis (Craik & Lockhart, 1972). This view assumes that "shallow" processing of a word involves attending to physical features, that is, its orthography or sound, with the result being an unstable or transitory memory trace. "Deep" processing is said to occur when semantic content is examined, and it results in a stronger memory trace. One hypothesis, then, might be that high-anxiety subjects have a deficit in processing deep (semantic) features, but no deficit in terms of processing shallow (physical) attributes. While arousal and anxiety may not be identical, the arousal results noted above are consistent with this interpretation.A test of this hypothesis should be possible in free recall, given that the word list involves both shallow and deep dimensions for organization. The present experiment used a list construction with both rhyming (shallow) and word-associate ( deep) relationships in the same list (cf. Dolinsky, 1972). With such a list, subjects can cluster their recall by associates, rhymes, or both. The anxiety-depth hypothesis suggests that high-anxiety subjects would show a deficit in terms of associative organization, as has been found previously, but no deficit should be observed for acoustic organization. As a methodological point, the method of list presentation was either visual or auditory, to determine whether this had any effect on the perception of the presence of the acoustic relationships. METHOD Subjects and DesignSixty-four students in introductory psychology courses were selected on the basis of test anxiety scores (Sarason, 1972). High-anxiety subjects had scores greater than 19 (mean = 28.1), and low-anxiety subjects had scores below 10 (mean = 7.2). The basic design was a 2 by 2 factorial for test anxiety (h...

show abstract

Clustering and free recall with alternative organizational cues.

Cited by 8 publications

References 7 publications

Serial and free recall: Common effects and common mechanisms? A reply to Murdock (2008).

Serial and free recall: Common effects and common mechanisms? A reply to Murdock (2008).

Semantic and formational clustering in deaf and hearing subjects’ free recall of signs

Test anxiety, input modality, and levels of organization in free recall

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About