Memory & Cognition

, Volume 8, Issue 2, pp 133–140 | Cite as

Accessing integrated and nonintegrated propositional structures in memory

  • Frank R. Yekovich
  • Leon Manelis


This paper investigates the access properties associated with different propositional structures. Two memory experiments are reported, in which the underlying structures of sentences were integrated or not. Some sentences tested had the same concept repeated across the propositions (integrated), whereas other sentences had no explicit repeated arguments (non-integrated). Accessibility to the memory traces of the sentences was manipulated through the acquisition and the testing conditions. In Experiment 1, subjects received either immediate or delayed recall tests, under free or cued conditions. Integrated sentences were recalled better than nonintegrated ones under conditions of high accessibility (immediate recall or delayed cued recall). In contrast, under the low-access condition (delayed free recall), nonintegrated sentences were recalled slightly better than the integrated ones. Experiment 2 confirmed and extended the results for delayed free recall. Here again, under conditions of low sentence access, nonintegrated sentences were recalled better. These results were interpreted according to theory dealing with the lag effect in list learning.


Free Recall Retention Interval Memory Trace Recall Test Sentence Type 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Anderson, R. C. The control of student mediating processes during verbal learning and instruction.Review of Educational Research, 1970,40, 349–370.Google Scholar
  2. Clark, H. H. The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1973,12, 335–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clark, H. H. Inferences in comprehension. In D. LaBerge & S. J. Samuels (Eds.),Basic processes in reading: Perception and comprehension. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1977.Google Scholar
  4. Crowder, R. G.Principles of learning and memory. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1976.Google Scholar
  5. Glenberg, A. M. Monotonic and nonmonotonic lag effects in paired-associate and recognition memory paradigms.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1976,15, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Glenberg, A. M. Influences of retrieval processes on the spacing effect in free recall.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1977,3, 282–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Glenberg, A. M. Component-levels theory of the effects of spacing of repetitions on recall and recognition.Memory & Cognition, 1979,7, 95–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hayes-Roth, B., &Thorndyke, P. W. Integration of knowledge from text.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1979,18, 91–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hayes-Roth, B., &Walker, C. H. Configurai effects in human memory.Cognitive Science, 1979,3, 119–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kintsch, W.The representation of meaning in memory. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1974.Google Scholar
  11. Kintsch, W. Comprehension and memory for text. In W. K. Estes (Ed.),Handbook of learning and cognitive processes (Vol. 6). Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1978.Google Scholar
  12. Kintsch, W., Kozminsky, E., Streby, W. J., Mckoon, G., &Keenan, J. M. Comprehension and recall of text as a function of content variables.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1975,14, 196–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Landauer, T. K. Memory without organization: Properties of a model with random storage and undirected retrieval.Cognitive Psychology, 1975,7, 495–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Manelis, L., &Yekovich, F. R. Repetitions of propositional arguments in sentences.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1976,15, 301–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Moeser, S. D. The role of experimental design in investigations of the fan effect.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1979,5, 125–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Thorndyke, P. W. Cognitive structures in comprehension and memory of narrative discourse.Cognitive Psychology, 1977,9, 77–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Wike, E. L., &Church, J. D. Comments on Clark's “The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy.”Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1976,15, 249–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frank R. Yekovich
    • 1
  • Leon Manelis
    • 2
  1. 1.School of EducationCatholic University of AmericaWashington, D.C.
  2. 2.Illinois State UniversityNormal

Personalised recommendations