Abstract
Investigations of semantic normalization of discourse have not generally controlled for perceived connectiveness of materials, depth of processing, and retention interval. The current experiment investigated semantic normalization in paraphrase and recall as a function of whether sentences were paraphrased or merely copied, of whether sentences were perceived by subjects to be connected or unrelated, and of retention interval. Results indicated that significantly more normalization occurred in paraphrase than in recall, that more normalization and better recall occurred when sentences were perceived as related, and that there was more normalization and better recall when sentences were paraphrased than when they were copied. No significant differences in normalization were found as a function of retention interval. Results are discussed in terms of depth of processing and a need for learners to integrate congruent and discrepant material into cohesive entities by use of grammatical articles, article changes, and intrusions that psychologically connect unrelated sentences.
Similar content being viewed by others
References Notes
Luftig, R. L., & Johnson, R. E.Normalization of semantically encoded sentences. Paper presented to the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, New York, 1978.
Luftig, R. L., & Johnson, R. E. Identification and recall of structurally important idea units by mentally retarded pupils.American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1982, 86, 495–502.
References
Anderson, J. R.Cognitive psychology and its implications. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1980.
Anderson, J. R., & Bower, G. H.Human associative memory. Washington, D.C.: Winston, 1973.
Bartlett, F. C.Remembering. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1932.
Bobrow, S., & Bower, G. H. Comprehension and recall of sentences.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969,80, 455–461.
Bower, G. H. Experiments on story comprehension and recall.Discourse Processes, 1978,1, 211–231.
Bransford, J. D., Barclay, J. R., & Franks, J. J. Sentence memory: A constructive versus interpretive approach.Cognitive Psychology, 1972,3, 193–209.
Bransford, J. D., & Franks, J. J. The abstraction of linguistic ideas.Cognitive Psychology, 1971,2, 331–350.
Bransford, J. D., & Johnson, M. K. Contextual prerequisites for understanding: Some investigations of comprehension and recall.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1972,11, 717–726.
Brown, A. L. The development of memory: Knowing, knowing about knowing, and knowing how to know. In H. W. Reese (Ed.),Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 10). New York: Academic Press, 1976.
Cofer, C. N. Constructive processes in memory.American Scientist, 1973,61, 537–543.
Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. Levels of processing: A framework for memory research.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1972,11, 671–684.
Craik, F. I. M., & Tulving, E. Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1975,104, 268–294.
Dawes, R. M. Memory and distortion of meaningful written material.British Journal of Psychology, 1966,57, 77–86.
De Villiers, P. A. Imagery and theme in recall of connected discourse.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1974,103, 263–268.
Dooling, D. J., & Christiaanson, R. E. Episodic and semantic aspects of memory for prose.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1977,3, 428–436.
Fillenbaum, S. Pragmatic normalization: Further results for some conjunctive and disjunctive sentences.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1974,102, 574–578.
Frase, L. T. Prose processing. In G. H. Bower (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation, (Vol. 9). New York: Academic Press, 1975.
Gomulicki, B. R. Recall as an abstractive process.Acta Psychologica, 1956,12, 77–94.
Hyde, T. S., & Jenkins, J. J. Recall for words as a function of semantic, graphic, and syntactic orienting tasks.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1973,12, 471–480.
Johnson, R. E. Recall of prose as function of the structural importance of the linguistic units.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1970,9, 12–20.
Johnson, R. E. Abstractive processes in the remembering of prose.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1974,66, 772–779.
Kintsch, W.The representation of meaning in memory. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum, 1974.
Kintsch, W. Memory for prose. In C. N. Cofer (Ed.),The structure of human memory. New York: Freeman, 1976, Pp. 90–113.
Kintsch, W., Kozminsky, E., Streby, W. J., McKoon, G., & Keenan, J. J. Comprehension and recall of text as a function of content variables.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1975,14, 196–214.
Meyer, B. J. The organization of prose and its effects on memory. Amsterdam: North Holland, 1975.
Paul, I. H. Studies in remembering: The reproduction of connected and extended verbal material.Psychological Issues, 1959,1 (2).
Rickards, J. P., & August, G. J. Generative underlining strategies in prose recall.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1975,67, 860–865.
Schank, R. C. The role of memory in language processing. In C. N. Cofer (Ed.),The structure of human memory, New York: Freeman, 1976.
Sulin, R. A., & Dooling, D. J. Intrusion of a thematic idea in retention of prose.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1974,103, 255–262.
Summers, S. A., & Fleming, J. S. Construction and reconstruction in memory.American Journal of Psychology, 1971,84, 513–520.
Zangwill, O. L. Remembering revistited.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1972,24, 123–138.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Luftig, R.L. Normalization in paraphrase and recall: Effects of processing, grammatical article type, and retention interval. J Psycholinguist Res 11, 127–140 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01068216
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01068216