Single-letter cue selection and degree of paired-associate learning in retardates.

Abstract

Retarded 5s learned redundant-stimulus paired associates (PAs) in which the stimuli were trigrams and the responses single digits. Each S was responsepretrained and then randomly assigned to one of seven different groups. Each group experienced a different level of PA learning: 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 2 perfect, or 8 overlearning trials. The 5s were tested for digit recall to each letter from the trigrams presented singly and performance was scored according to either a single-or double-criterion method. Both of these modes of analysis showed first letters to be better recall cues than the other two (after 2 perfect trials) and a large increase in the effectiveness of third letters after 8 overlearning trials. There was, however, one major difference: single-criterion scoring indicated that the amount of single-letter selection increased across trials, but the double-criterion scoring revealed that it was actually two-letter usages which were more frequently employed with increasing degrees of PA learning.

Stimulus selection and meaningfulness at different stages of paired-associate learning.

“…It also should be noted that previous investigators have recognized the importance of examining the variable of degree of learning in the color-trigram (Houston, 1967) and wordtrigram (James & Greeno, 1967) redundancy paradigms. However, these studies have focused only on cue: response associations, and they have not produced entirely consistent findings (see Berry, Joubert, & Baumeister, 1971).…”

Stimulus Selection by the Retarded: List Length and Response Requirement

“…In two respects, the cue-selection behaviors of retarded individuals closely resemble those of normal people, whether children or college students: (a) with less meaningful trigrams, the predominant strategy is to use a single letter as the functional stimulus, and (b) this strategy is influenced by the position of the letter within the trigram, for first and third letters are preferred. In another respect, however, there does seem to be a difference, in that nonretarded children and adults exhibit this strategy much more quickly than retarded subjects (see Berry, Joubert, and Baumeister, 1971;Berry, Mulhern, and Duncan, 1975; The present experiment focused on the cue-selection strategies retarded individuals use during paired-associate learning. The main issue here was whether the extent to which a subject relies on a particular cue-selection strategy depends on the processing demands inherent in the task.…”

“…In this connection, a series of experiments has been recently reported in an effort to isolate the variables that control the cueselection strategies retarded individuals use in verbal learning (e.g., Baumeister and Berry, 1970;Baumeister, Berry, and Forehand, 1969;Berry and Baumeister, 1973a;1973b;Berry, Joubert, and Baumeister, 1971;1972).…”

Effect of speed of learning and degree of learning on cue selection.

“…Presentation of a response paired with a compound stimulus after learning the response to one component of the compound did not produce learning to the additional components in a paired-associate task (Richardson & Stan ton, in press), but learning to additional components did occur in a discrimination task (Siegel & Stevenson, 1966). Berry, Joubert, and Baumeister (1971) found an increase in the number of two-letter solutions starting relatively early in learning with retardates as 5s. Almost every possible empirical outcome has been obtained in studies varying degree of learning, and there is little to suggest what produces the different results.…”