8
This article was downloaded by: [Tufts University] On: 08 October 2014, At: 06:49 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK The Journal of General Psychology Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vgen20 Group Pre-Training for Serial Rote Learning by Means of a Moving Picture Technique David A. Grant a , Dorothy E. Schneider a & John C. Goodale a a Department of Psychology , University of Wisconsin , USA Published online: 06 Jul 2010. To cite this article: David A. Grant , Dorothy E. Schneider & John C. Goodale (1949) Group Pre-Training for Serial Rote Learning by Means of a Moving Picture Technique, The Journal of General Psychology, 40:1, 89-94, DOI: 10.1080/00221309.1949.9918239 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00221309.1949.9918239 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

Group Pre-Training for Serial Rote Learning by Means of a Moving Picture Technique

  • Upload
    john-c

  • View
    216

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

This article was downloaded by: [Tufts University]On: 08 October 2014, At: 06:49Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

The Journal of GeneralPsychologyPublication details, including instructions for authorsand subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vgen20

Group Pre-Training for SerialRote Learning by Means of aMoving Picture TechniqueDavid A. Grant a , Dorothy E. Schneider a & John C.Goodale aa Department of Psychology , University ofWisconsin , USAPublished online: 06 Jul 2010.

To cite this article: David A. Grant , Dorothy E. Schneider & John C. Goodale (1949)Group Pre-Training for Serial Rote Learning by Means of a Moving Picture Technique,The Journal of General Psychology, 40:1, 89-94, DOI: 10.1080/00221309.1949.9918239

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00221309.1949.9918239

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tuf

ts U

nive

rsity

] at

06:

49 0

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

The Journal o f General Psychology, 1949, 40, 89-94.

G R O U P PRE-TRAINING F O R SERIAL R O T E L E A R N I N G BY MEANS OF A M O V I N G P I C T U R E TECHNIQUE*

Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin

DAVID A. GRANT, DOROTHY E. SCHNEIDER, AND JOHN C. GOODALE]

A. INTRODUCTION T h e present investigation was conducted to test the practicability of pre-

training subjects in groups for r6te-learning experiments by means of a film- projection technique.

As Melton points out in his excellent paper on methodology in studies of human learning (5) a number of experimenters have found it desirable to pre-train their S’s in r6te learning so that variability introduced by “learn- ing to learn” nonsense material does not inflate the error variance of the ex- periment and obscure the effects of the experimental variable. Pre-training in the case of nonsense syllables usually has consisted of requiring that each S learn five or six preliminary lists before going to the experiment proper (4, 8, 1). Data of Luh (4) and Ward (8 ) indicate that five or six preliminary lists would be a minimum required to compensate for the sharp initial drop in to ta l errors and trials t o a criterion which takes place in the learning of the first few lists of syllables. In some instances even further pre-training would be necessary (4, 6).

T h e task of pre-training 30 to 100 S’s is extremely time-consuming if done individual by individual. Group pre-training would involve a great economy of time and would permit experimenters to use statistically adequate groups of S’S.

T h e obvious technique for group experiments would involve the use of motion pictures or film-strips and some sort of projecting device. This has been done for classroom demonstration experiments (3) , but apparently not for group research work or for pre-training. In the present study, moving pictures were selected as the group pre-training device, and an attempt was made to demonstrate whether or not the moving picture technique would yield results comparable to individual pre-training using the memory drum.

*Received in the Editorial Office on January 10, 1948. ‘This research was supported by the Research Committee of the Graduate School

of the University of Wisconsin from special funds voted by the State Legislature for 1946-47. The writers wish to thank Miss Billie Tallantis who aided by conducting some of the experiments.

89

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tuf

ts U

nive

rsity

] at

06:

49 0

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

90 JOURNAL OF GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY

B. APPARATUS AND GENERAL PROCEDURE 1. Materials

Nine serial lists of 12 three-letter nonsense syllables were used. Six of these were pre-training lists and three were test lists. All lists were balanced for association value according to Kreuger’s list (Z), and the test lists were constructed carefully according to the conventional rules (4, 8) . All were printed in India ink with a Leroy lettering set on White Vellum. T h e lists were exposed by means of a Hull-type memory drum adjusted to give a two- second exposure for each syllable with six seconds between repetitions of the lists.

T h e six pre-training lists were photographed from the drum and later pro- jected at sound-speed on 16 mm. film. T h e film for each list was cemented to form a continuous loop2 which could be threaded into the projector and projected continuously, repeating the list as many times as desired.

2. General Procedure

In general, S’s of the experimental groups learned three pre-training lists the first day in a 50-minute group film session. T w o days later they learned the second three pre-training lists in the same manner. On the third day, which was scheduled from one day to one week later, each S learned the three test-lists from the memory drum in an individual session.

All groups were warned before pre-training that their purpose was to acquire facility in memorizing the lists and that they would be tested later. T h e method of anticipation was used throughout, and the S’s pronounced the syllables, aloud or subvocally, depending on the specific procedure used.

3. Specific Procedure

Three experimental and one control procedures were used. These are outlined in Table 1. T h e three experimental or motion picture groups differed in that each pre-training list was exposed 10 times to S’s of Group 10M whereas each pre-training list was presented 25 times to Groups 25M and 25Y. S’s of Groups l O M and 2 5 M were instructed to try to anticipate each syllable by pronouncing it subvocallq. during the pre-training trials. 8’s of Group 25Y, however, were instructed to anticipate aloud or vocally. (They were in-

T h e ideal procedure might be to use a special full reel of syllables, but a loop is less expensive and permits great flexibility in number of exposures per list. Practical problems arise in keeping the long loop of film clean. In this experiment the projected film was permitted to fall loosely into a large clean cardboard box from which it continually reissued for further projection.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tuf

ts U

nive

rsity

] at

06:

49 0

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

P ? T

AB

LE

1

OU

TL

INE

OF T

HE

EX

PER

IMEN

TAL PR

OC

EDU

RE

Exp

erim

enta

l (M

otio

n pi

ctur

e)

. G

roup

s C

ontr

ol

(Dru

m)

10M

25M

25V

grou

p Pr

oced

ure

(N = 36

) (N = 24)

(N = 36

) (N = 30)

.Da

y 1.

Thr

ee

pre-

10

pr

esen

tatio

ns

per

25

pres

enta

tions

pe

r 25

pr

esen

tatio

ns

per

25 p

rese

ntat

ions

per

tr

aini

ng

lists

, A

, B,

lis

t - sub

-voc

al

an-

list-s

ub-v

ocal

an

ti-

list

voca

l an

ticip

a-

list-v

ocal

an

ticip

a-

and

C,

lear

ned

ticip

atio

n ci

patio

n tio

n tio

n

Duy

2.

Thr

ee

pre-

Sa

me

as a

bove

Sa

me

as a

bove

Sa

me

as a

bove

Sa

me

as a

bove

tr

aini

ng

lists

, D

, E,

and

F, l

earn

ed

Day

3.

T

hree

te

st

lists

le

arne

d w

ith

All

ies

f pr

oced

ures

ide

ntic

al. Drum p

rese

ntat

ion.

fir

st

test

lis

t re

- V

ocal

ant

icip

atio

n to

a c

rite

rion

of

two

succ

essi

ve

lear

ned,

I,

11, 1

11,

I, or

der

perf

ect

repe

titio

ns o

f ea

ch li

st.

a Z r3 c P

PI ?

‘P

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tuf

ts U

nive

rsity

] at

06:

49 0

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

92 JOURNAL OF GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY

structed to vie with each other in speed and loudness of response.) After each pre-training list had been presented for the last time, each 8 of the experi- mental groups was given a slip of paper on which he was asked to try to write the list in the correct order. This procedure was instituted chiefly to detect 8’s who were not working. (None were detected.)

For members of the experimental groups the pre-training lists were ex- posed by projection, but the same six lists were learned by 8’s of the Control Group from the memory drum in two individual sessions. Each pre-training list was exposed 25 times to 8’s of the Control Group.

On the third experimental day, which was scheduled one day to one week later, all groups were treated exactly alike. They learned the three test lists and then relearned the first test list. All test sessions were individual, and exposure was by means of the drum. Lists were learned by anticipation to a criterion of two successive perfect repetitions. Differences in difficulty of the test lists were balanced out, in each group, by means of permuted orders of presentation.

All 8’s were men and women students who volunteered from elementary classes in psychology. T h e 8’s had never before served in rBte learning ex- periments. T h e number in each group is given in Table I.

C. RESULTS T h e results of the experiment are summarized in Table 2. T h e mean

number of trials to (and including) the criterion of two perfect recitations is given for each group. T h e successive columns refer, respectively, to the first, second, third, and first-relearned lists. T h e control group, pre-trained in the traditional manner, was markedly superior on the first list, and was superior to the 10-trial movie group and the 25-trial-vocal group on the sec- ond list. But on the third list, all groups performed very much alike.

TABLE 2 MEAN NUMBER OF TRIALS TO LEARN SUCCESSIVE LISTS FROM THE MEMORY DRUM ON DAY 3

Group Order of learning lists Relearn

First Second Third first list

10 M 32.83 23.44 20.96 13.09 25 M 25.19 18.47 19.14 9.55 25 V 25.72 22.52 21.38 12.43

Control 23.94 18.45 21.45 11.02

Between Groups Mean Square

Error Variance (34.02)

F = 12.59* 6.26* 1/1.10

*Significant at 0.1% confidence level.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tuf

ts U

nive

rsity

] at

06:

49 0

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

D. A. GRANT, D. E. SCHNEIDBR, AND J. C. GOODALE 93

T h e data were analyzed by means of analysis of variance. T h e analysis took into account a latin-square feature (7) of the experimental design which permitted complete elimination of systematic variation in list difficulty and systematic variation in subject performance from the error variance. T h e overall mean square for error, computed from 236 degrees of freedom, was 34.02. When this was divided into the between-group mean-squares for the successive lists on Day 3, the F’s given in the last line of Table 2 were ob- tained. T h e F’s for the first and second lists were highly significant, but the F for the third list was not significant. In effect, this means that the clear-cut differences beween groups on the first and second lists stand-up statistically, but that the negligible differences on the third list do not. T h e four groups gradually became homogeneous so that by the third list a fairly sensitive sta- tistical test could not discriminate between them. This would imply that the experimental groups were learning to learn nonsense syllables faster than was the control group. T h e analysis of variance showed that the practice effect in all four experimental groups was highly significant, but the trend in the control group was least striking.

It may be added, incidentally, that differences in list difficulty were statis- tically significant only in the 10M group, but that systematic differences between 8’s were highly significant for all groups.

All groups relearned the first list after learning the first, second, and third in order to indicate whether the movie technique had any effect upon more complicated variables such as interference. T h e savings score of initial trials to learn minus trials to relearn is, however, a complex measure of both nega- tive interference and positive transfer effects. T h e savings scores averaged 12.92, 16.29, 18.64, and 19.74 for the control, 25Y, 25M, and 1OM groups respectively. T h e analysis of variance of the savings scores yielded an error variance of 327.02 based upon 114 degrees of freedom. On the basis of this error variance the F’s for group differences, list differences, and group-list in- teraction, were all less than 1.00.

D. DISCUSSION AND SUMMARY O n the whole, there is little doubt that the motion picture technique will

be feasible in the pre-training of 8’s for serial rBte learning experiments. There would appear to be little choice among the three experimental methods, but the present findings suggest that the procedure of the 25M group is slightly superi- or to the other procedures. In short, 25 trials per list with sub-vocal response on the part of S may be the best procedure to use during the six pre-training lists. In practice the six pre-training lists may be learned in two one-hour

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tuf

ts U

nive

rsity

] at

06:

49 0

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

94 ‘ JOURNAL OF GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY

movie sessions. Checking, after each list, by having S write the retained syllables is probably to be recommended to catch “loafers” in spite of the fact that the 8’s of the present study appeared to quite conscientious.

T h e present data show clearly that one or two lists should be learned from the drum by the movie pre-trained S to make him comparable to the drum- pre-trained S. This is obviously desirable from many standpoints; e.g., S must learn to “beat the drum” with his report and adapt to the E and the new experimental situation. H e then will be equivalent to a drum-trained S trained with eight lists’ experience!

T h e great saving of time permitted by this pre-training method should make it extremely helpful to the researcher in serial learning. T h e reduc- tion of time required to pre-train 100 8’s amounts to about 200 hours which should encourage the use of statistically adequate groups for such experiments.

T h e possibility of using such a technique as this in the actual test lists of the experiment has been proposed by Littman and Tye ( 3 ) . This applica- tion of the technique appears to be almost impossible when the anticipation method is used because of the difficulty of recording responses, but the use of recognition, retained members, and other methods of measuring learning and retention make practicable very satisfactory group experiments.

REFERENCES 1. HOVLAND, C. I. Experimental studies in r6te learning theory: I. Reminiscence

following learning by massed and by distributed practice. J . Exper. Psychol.,

2. KRUECER, W. C. F. The relative difficulty of nonsense syllables. J. Exper.

3. LITMAN, R. A,, & TYE, V. M. Group experiments and demonstrations in

4. LUH, C. W. The conditions of retention. Psychol. Monog., 1922, 31, No. 142. 5. MELTON, A. W. The methodology of experimental studies of human learning

and retention: I. The functions of methodology and the available criteria for evaluating different experimental methods. Psychol. Bull., 1936, 33, 305-394. (See esp. p. 360.)

Retroactive and proactive inhibition in retention: Evidence for a two factor theory of retroactive inhibition. Amer. J.

1938, 22, 201-224.

Psychol., 1934, 17, 145-153.

learning. Amer. J. Psychol., 1947, 60, 113-116.

6. MELTON, A. W., & YON LACKUM, W. J.

P s ~ c ~ o ~ . , 1941, 64, 157-173. 7. SNEDECOR, G. W. Statistical Methods. Ames, Iowa: Collegiate Press, 1946. 8. WARD, L. B. Reminiscence and r6te learning. Psychol. Monog., 1937, 49, No. 220.

Department of Psychology Vniwersity of Wisconsin Madison 6 , Wisconsin

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tuf

ts U

nive

rsity

] at

06:

49 0

8 O

ctob

er 2

014