The effects of meaningfulness, awareness, and type of design in verbal mediation

Horton, David L.

doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(64)80040-2

Cited by 26 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Paired associates were retained better following learning of low meaningful materials than high meaningful materials (see Young,et al, 1968). Yet mediation is facilitated following high meaningfulness materials (see Horton, 1964, Peterson et aL, 1964, and Popp and Voss, 1967. Also, affect seems more potent in mediation than is meaningfulness according to the results of this study while in word association studies meaningfulness seems to be more potent than affect (see Greer and Mollenauer, 1964).…”

Section: Association Abilitysupporting

confidence: 47%

“…Mandler and Earhard (1964), in studying interlist interference, found that backward associations formed in learning the first list, B-A, would be extinguished during the learning of the second list, B-C, Horton (1964) found better mediation with high meaningfulness mediators. Horton also found better performance on mediation pairs in an unmixed list in comparison to a mixed list.…”

Section: Affect and Meaningfulnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Affect and Meaningfulness as Variables in Mediate Association

Aagard

Stone

1972

Psychol Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Affect and meaningfulness in verbal mediation were studied. The design of the study included Phase I, which varied the affect levels (high and low) while holding meaningfulness constant at a medium level, and Phase II, which varied both the affect level (high and low) of the mediators and the level of meaningfulness (high and low) of the non-mediators. Results showed that high-affect mediators produced superior mediation and that an affect by meaningfulness interaction occurred. High affect was more potent than high meaningfulness in producing superior mediation.

show abstract

Section: Association Abilitysupporting

confidence: 47%

Section: Affect and Meaningfulnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Affect and Meaningfulness as Variables in Mediate Association

Aagard

Stone

1972

Psychol Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It should, however, be noted that the present B-E condition was undoubtly rather uniquely favorable for the utilization (cf., Schulz & Lovelace, 1964;Horton, 1964) of mediating associations (i. e., highly available mediators, a long test-list anticipation interval and minimal attenuation of effective utilization of mediating associations due to low availability of test-list response terms). Put another way, the present results should not, and cannot, be interpreted as casting doubt directly on the reproduceability of Mandler and Earhard's results.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mediation with pseudomediation controlled: Chaining is not an artifact!

1965

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The interpolated mediation-control task yielded reliable evidence of mediated facilitation. More associates were claimed on the second than on the first association test but the increase did not appear to be influenced by the particular conditions of the interpolated task.Mediated facilitation has been shown to increase when the meaningfulness of all of the learning materials was increased (Peterson & Blattner, 1963) and when the meaningfulness of the common-mediating-term was increased (Horton, 1964). It is possible that the items themselves became more' 'meaningful' , in these experimental sessions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Mediated facilitation has been shown to increase when the meaningfulness of all of the learning materials was increased (Peterson & Blattner, 1963) and when the meaningfulness of the common-mediating-term was increased (Horton, 1964). It is possible that the items themselves became more' 'meaningful' , in these experimental sessions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Mediated meaningfulness?

Peterson

1966

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Changes in the frequencies with which items elicited claimed or stated associates were studied before and after the items had participated in mediation and in control paradigms. The interpolated mediation-control task yielded reliable evidence of mediated facilitation. More associates were claimed on the second than on the first association test but the increase did not appear to be influenced by the particular conditions of the interpolated task.Mediated facilitation has been shown to increase when the meaningfulness of all of the learning materials was increased (Peterson & Blattner, 1963) and when the meaningfulness of the common-mediating-term was increased (Horton, 1964). It is possible that the items themselves became more' 'meaningful' , in these experimental sessions. The present experiment was designed to assess changes in the frequency with which associates were claimed for items before and after these items had been presented in an interpolated task. The interpolated task presented the items in two mediation paradigms and in two control paradigms.The mediation paradigms were a chaining model, A-B, B-C, A-CDE. and a response equivalence model, B-C, B-A, A-CDE. MethodThe basic design was to present a 96-trigram association test before (ATl) and after (AT2) the trigrams had been presented as part of an interpolated task. The association tests were prepared by typing 96 consonant trigrams (CCCs) of from 0 to 42% association value (Witmer, 1935) on memory drum tapes. Two random sequences of the 96 CCCs were prepared.The interpolated task consisted of 24 "sets." A "set" was defined as the consecutive presentation of five cards representing either a mediation or a control format for one of the two paradigms. The 24 sets assigned to an S consisted of a randomized ordering of six sets representing the mediation form of the chaining paradigm (Paradigm I2)j six sets representing the control form of Paradigm Ij six, representing the mediation formj and six, the control form of the response equivalence paradigm (Paradigm VIII 2 ). Four different interpolated tasks were established so that the trigrams could be used in all conditions over the entire group of Ss.To balance the use of the trigrams, sets representing the mediation form, Paradigm I, were constructed and then the trigrams of these sets were systematically re-positioned to correspond to the other conditions as noted below. Three trigrams with minimum letteroverlap were chosen for the A, B, and C positions of each of the 24 mediation sets. The remaining 24 trigrams were used as the X-trigrams ofthe control sets. Thus, for each S, 24 trigrams were presented on ATI Psychon. Sci., 1966, Vol. 5 (2) MARGARET JEAN PETERSON INDIANA UNIVERSITYand A T2 but were not included in the particular interpolated task assigned to S. These trigrams were designated the "neutral X" items.The mediation form for Paradigm IwasA-B,A, B-C, B, A-CDE. The immediate retention of an acquisition pair was tested by presenting the stimulus trigram alone, e.g., A was shown immediately aft...

show abstract

The effects of meaningfulness, awareness, and type of design in verbal mediation

Cited by 26 publications

References 16 publications

Affect and Meaningfulness as Variables in Mediate Association

Affect and Meaningfulness as Variables in Mediate Association

Mediation with pseudomediation controlled: Chaining is not an artifact!

Mediated meaningfulness?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About