The effects of syllable familiarization on rote learning, association value, and reminiscence.

Riley, Donald A.; Phillips, Laura W.

doi:10.1037/h0038634

Cited by 17 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 12 publications

(12 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although f decreases AL, AP remains unaltered. Schulz and Thysell conclude "The results of the present study, when considered in conjunction with those obtained previously by Riley & Phillips (1959), would seem to justify a firm conclusion that familiarization does not affect !!!. Furthermore this conclusion now has considerable generality .... " However, the general problem of deciding whether or not f affects mf can only be resolved by choosing among the several definitions of mf.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The effect of familiarization instructions on associative latency and learning

Gillooly

1966

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This experiment investigates the effects of using different familiarization instructions (Spell or Pronounce) on associative latency and learning. Significant effects (reduction in associative latency and the number of errors to criterion) were obtained only with instructions to pronounce. The implications of this phenomenon are discussed in terms of the effect of familiarization on meaningfulness. The reasons for discarding present, widely-used definitions of meaningfulness are cited. Recent evidence supports the conclusion that familiarization reduces the latency of Ss I responses to

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

“…eve trigrams (Gillooly, 1965) in spite of the earlier data (Riley & Phillips, 1959). Further, it was suggested that it is the familiarization instructions given Ss (Pronounce or Spell) that may be the determinant of the effect.…”

mentioning

confidence: 93%

The effect of familiarization instructions on associative latency and learning

Gillooly

1966

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A recent experiment by Riley and Phillips (1959) suggests that treatment n1 applied to nonsense materia1 increases familiarity per ~' but does not increase~ the meaningfulness of the material. In ether words, a familiarized nonsense sy1lable may still be nonsensical.…”

Section: Relating Independent and Dependent Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Semantic satiation and paired-associate learning.

Kanungo¹,

Lambert²,

Mauer³

1962

Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTIn the course of this research work many have helped me, to whom I can only inadequately express my gratitude.To my advisor, Dr. Wallace E. Lambert, whose careful and constant guidance made completion of this thesis possible, my debt is too great ever to be repaid. INTRODUCTIONThe normal human perceives his environment as a stable and meaningful world of objects, persons, and events, whereas for a newborn child, the same environment probably appears as an aggregate of meaningless shapes and movements. These differences in perceptions are attributable to differences in experiences and contacts with the environment. Through repeated contacts, the individual gradually learns to perceive stimuli in predictable relations and is able to improve his future reactions to the same or similar stimuli.In other words, perceiving meaningful elements in one's environment consciousness within a few seconds after the fixation began. They also pointed out that the meaning of the word vanished when its proper sound image disappeared, and that the disappearance was due to a shifting of attention from one part of the visually perceived word to another. For instance, for their subjects, the word "castle" became "cast-le", the word "toward" became "to-ward," and so on. They also noticed that with prolonged visual fixation a word may look familiar and yet may cease to have any meaning. The authors, following Titchener, interpreted the findings in terms of the "core-contextn theory of meaning. For them the meaning of a word was determined by the associated ideas (context) that word evokes when presented to the subject. Thus they differentiated "meaning" from "familiarity," and they argued that their experiments clearly demonstrated the fact that familiarity does not necessarily involve associated ideas. In other words, prolonged visual fixation of a word leads to loss of meaning or "associative power" in a word without apparent loss of familiarity.Bassett and Warne (1919) used a continued verbal repetition procedure and found that with repetition the word !ost both its meaning and familiarity. The word after continued repetition appeared devoid of any sense and appeared foreign to their subjects. When the meaning of a word dropped away, subjects reported their experience to be very similar to that of encountering a nonsense syllable or a combination of sounds which was neither familiar nor unfamiliar. Occasionally the subjects reported "a feeling of blankness" probably due to the persistence of the sheer sound of the word. The meaning of the word was thus forced into the -6--background and the word lost its distinctiveness.

show abstract

“…Underwood & Schulz (1960) and Noble (1953) have both suggested that familiarization must precede meaningfulness, and they as well as others (Noble,1955;Schulz & Martin, 1964) have demonstrated that increasing the frequency of prior stimulation facilitates learning under widely varying conditions. Riley & Phillips (1959), however, found experimentally induced familiarity, in the form of a learning task involving CVCs, to have no effect on the meaningfulness of the CVCs. Similar results were obtained by Schulz & Thysell (1956), who found that 20 I-sec.…”

mentioning

confidence: 90%

Familiarity and meaningfulness in nonsense words

Moursund

1966

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Latencies of first associations to low-meaningful dissyllables were taken for five groups of Ss. Four of the groups were familiarized on dissyllables from the association I.ist; the fifth group was familiarized on a list containing scrambled versions of the association list. Results suggested that familiarization with the association I.ist words tended to increase m (as measured by association latency). Note 1. This study was carried out under the auspices of the Human Learning Research Institute, Michigan State University.

show abstract

The effects of syllable familiarization on rote learning, association value, and reminiscence.

Cited by 17 publications

References 12 publications

The effect of familiarization instructions on associative latency and learning

The effect of familiarization instructions on associative latency and learning

Semantic satiation and paired-associate learning.

Familiarity and meaningfulness in nonsense words

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About