Remember that old theory of memory? Well, forget it.

Jenkins, James J.

doi:10.1037/h0037399

Cited by 411 publications

(137 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

130

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Further research is needed to discover if meaning. One important lesson from cognitive psychology is that the brain is highly interpretive, whether we look at the intrusion of interpretation into quite peripheral levels of information processing (Erdelyi, 1974) or at aspects of longer term ideation (see Jenkins, 1974). Conceivably, there is another example of that general principle.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Semantic and phonetic memory codes in beginning readers

1979

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In two experiments a group (N = 15) of poor beginning readers and of good readers (N = 15) were auditorily presented with continuous item lists. The children were asked to indicate whether each item had occurred previously in the list. In Experiment 1, using real words, later items were related either semantically or as rhymes to earlier ones. False positives to each item type were taken as indices of memory coding and showed that good readers encoded both semantic and surface aspects of items. In contrast, poor readers made a large number of meaning-based confusions (saying "old" to house when home had been presented earlier) but almost none based on rhyme (home/comb confusions). In a second experiment, with phonetically legal nonwords as items, poor readers made a significant number of phonetic false positives, although the good reader controls made more. The results are interpreted as confirming that poor readers are relatively insensitive to surface features of language but that this weakness is most marked when sound and meaning are both available as memory codes. 333The research reported in this paper addresses the question of how young retarded readers code words and pseudowords in a memory task. The work was motivated by two sets of considerations: first, the accumulating evidence that poor readers show only a weak active awareness of the structure of the speech code and, second, arguments concerning the primacy of meaning over form in preliterate children's reaction to language. These latter ideas will be explored more fully following Experiment 1.There is now considerable evidence which indicates that preliterate children, and those who are experiencing difficulty in learning to read, perform poorly on word games that require them to manipulate aspects of the sounds of words. For example, Firth (1972) discovered that 8-year-old backward readers were much worse than an intelligence-matched group of average readers in eliding segments from orally presented words-in saying,for instance, what is left when IfI is taken from If ae nl (see also Bruce, 1964). In an unpublished study from our laboratory, Arnold (Note 1) confirmed Firth's findings with phoneme elision and extended the investigation to elision of syllabic segments from words (e.g., /lImItI minus /lIm/). Poor readers were also weaker at this task. Rozin and Gleitman (1977) have reviewed much of the available data on word segmentation and combination skills in retarded readers; they found consistently that these subjects were poorer than comparable coping readers.Difficulties in operating with the speech code are not (1976) showed that introducing acoustic confusability into to-be-memorized letter strings adversely affected performance of superior readers more than that of marginal and poor ones. This was true with both immediate and delayed recall and with visually or auditorily presented strings. In a similar vein, Mark, Shankweiler, Liberman, and Fowler (1977) found that the false-positive errors of good readers in a word recognition test ...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Semantic and phonetic memory codes in beginning readers

1979

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, recent explorations of a world view called "contextualism" (Jenkins, 1974;Sarbin, 1977), which emphasizes change and the context of events, suggest that future experiments testing the contextual change hypothesis might be productive.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Remembered duration: Effects of event and sequence complexity

Block

1978

Memory & Cognition

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments investigated the remembered duration of relatively long intervals. In both, subjects viewed two sequences of visual patterns. Then they unexpectedly were asked to make a comparative judgment of duration of the two intervals. In Experiment 1 there was no effect of complexity of the individual patterns on remembered duration. In Experiment 2, however, there was an effect of complexity of the entire sequence, with a complex sequence remembered as longer in duration than a simple sequence. In both experiments there was a positive timeorder error. Several subsequent memory tests were given in an attempt to determine what types of retrieval processes mediate remembered duration. Results were discussed in terms of several current hypotheses, and a contextual change hypothesis was proposed.

show abstract

“…Assumption 1 has received support from several studies in memory and psycholinguistics (R. C. Anderson & Ortony, 1975;Fodor, Bever, & Garrett, 1974;Foss & Harwood, 1973;Green, 1973;Jenkins, 1974;Marschark & Paivio, 1977). The interpretation, utilization, and retrieval of holistic constituents are believed to operate in a unitary fashion.…”

Section: A Holistic Chunking Model Of Sentence Encoding and Retrievalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tests of a holistic chunking model of sentence memory through analyses of noun intrusions

Graesser

1978

Memory & Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A holistic chunking model of sentence acquisition and retrieval is described and tested by a prompted sentence recall procedure. In this procedure, subjects first study a list of unrelated sentences and later receive single-word prompts to cue sentence recall. The model assumes that (1) words in sentences are grouped into propositions during acquisition, (2) the propositions are encoded holistically and later retrieved as units, and (3) the retrieval of one proposition does not automatically lead to recovery of other propositions in a sentence. The model was tested by patterns of intrusion errors. Noun intrusions for elements within a recovered proposition were always related conceptually to the presented nouns, even when a noun violated the co-occurrence restrictions of the verb (e.g., the tray loved the house). In contrast, noun intrusions for elements outside of the scope of a recovered proposition were often unrelated to presented nouns. It was argued that patterns of intrusion errors provide more appropriate tests for sentence structure than do quantitative patterns of correct recall, at least from the framework of the holistic chunking model.The acquisition and recall of sentences has been a popular paradigm for examining the representation of verbal material. In most studies, the sentences are simple and are not embedded in a referential or discourse context. Two questions will be pursued in this study: How are words in sentences grouped into constituents? Are any of the constituents encoded in a holistic unitary fashion? A holistic chunking model of sentence acquisition and recall will be pursued in the course of examining these questions. In addition, the present study will segregate some measures of memory performance that provide adequate tests of the holistic chunking model. Recent reports have critically reexamined the role of behavioral data in testing theories of representation (J. R. Anderson, 1976;J. R. Anderson & Bower, 1973; Kosslyn & Pomeranz, 1977;Norman & Bobrow, 1975). A HOLISTIC CHUNKING MODEL OF SENTENCE ENCODING AND RETRIEVALA holistic chunking model is proposed to account for the acquisition and retrieval of unrelated sentences in memory experiments. The four assumptions below Experiment 1 was supported by National Science Foundation Grant GB20798 and served as partial fulfillment of a doctoral dissertation. The author would like to thank the members of his dissertation committee, George Mandler (advisor), David E. Rumelhart, Lisa L. Newport, Roy G. D' Andrade, and Tim S. Smith, for their helpful advice and support. Wayne J. Boeck, Cheryl C. Graesser, Allen Munro, Donald A. Norman, Jan C. Rabinowitz, and Stanley Woll also provided constructive comments on earlier drafts of the manuscript. Requests for reprints should be sent to Arthur C. Graesser, Department of Psychology, California State University, Fullerton, California 92634. directly address the issues of segmentation and holism. Assumption 1. Some sentence constituents are encoded holistically.Assumption 2. Sentence "predicates" ...

show abstract

Remember that old theory of memory? Well, forget it.

Cited by 411 publications

References 17 publications

Semantic and phonetic memory codes in beginning readers

Semantic and phonetic memory codes in beginning readers

Remembered duration: Effects of event and sequence complexity

Tests of a holistic chunking model of sentence memory through analyses of noun intrusions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About