1966
DOI: 10.1037/h0023644
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Inverse forgetting in short-term memory.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

1
1
0

Year Published

1969
1969
1972
1972

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
1
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The deleterious effect of attenuated preparatory processing is comparable to the disruptive effect of interpolated activity (Brown, 1958;Peterson & Peterson, 1959). The facilitative effect of enhanced preparatory processing and the differential rates of forgetting for the firstand second-presented subsets are consistent with evidence reported by Crawford, Hunt, and Peak (1966), Hellyer (1962), Peterson andPeterson (1959), andSanders (1961) that rehearsal strengthens, rather than merely renews, material being retained. Amounts and rates of forgetting in this and previous studies are not easily compared because free recall, rather than ordered recall, was used here.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…The deleterious effect of attenuated preparatory processing is comparable to the disruptive effect of interpolated activity (Brown, 1958;Peterson & Peterson, 1959). The facilitative effect of enhanced preparatory processing and the differential rates of forgetting for the firstand second-presented subsets are consistent with evidence reported by Crawford, Hunt, and Peak (1966), Hellyer (1962), Peterson andPeterson (1959), andSanders (1961) that rehearsal strengthens, rather than merely renews, material being retained. Amounts and rates of forgetting in this and previous studies are not easily compared because free recall, rather than ordered recall, was used here.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…level of C is considered for the E-Pr materials, the difference between performance at the 0-and 5-sec. levels of R represents an inverse forgetting effect such as that reported by Crawford, Hunt, and Peak (1966). This difference was tested by means of the Newman-Keuls procedure (Winer, 1962, Ch.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%