Advertisement

Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society

, Volume 15, Issue 5, pp 348–350 | Cite as

The influence of advanced outlines on the free recall of prose

  • Andrew D. Cohen
  • Arthur C. Graesser
Article
  • 144 Downloads

Abstract

This study examined how the free recall of prose is affected by (1) outlines as advanced organizers, (2) preexperimental familiarity with the material, and (3) text genre, that is, narrative vs. expository prose. College students studied a two-level outline, a one-level outline, or no outline before listening to 400- to 500-word passages that varied in familiarity and narrativity. Subjects later recalled the passages and then generated their own subjective outline of each passage. Overall, the outline manipulation did not significantly influence recall. However, significant negative correlations were found between the amount recalled and the degree of subjective-experimental outline correspondence. These outcomes are discussed in the context of interference theory, a depth-of-processing framework, and an automatic comprehension hypothesis. Whereas familiarity had no significant effect on recall, text genre had a robust effect. Less information was recalled from expository passages than from narrative passages.

Keywords

Free Recall Experimental Outline Advanced Organizer Prose Interference Theory 
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.

References

  1. Ausubel, D. P. The use of advanced organizers in learning and retention of meaningful verbal material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1960, 51, 267–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ausubel, D. P., & Fitzgerald, D. Organizer, general back ground, and antecedent learning variables in sequential verbal learning. Journal of Educational Psychology; 1962, 53, 243–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barnes, B. R., & Clawson, E. V. Do advanced organizers facilitate learning? Recommendations for further research based on an analysis of 32 studies. Review of Educational Research, 1975, 45, 637–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bransford, J.D. Human cognition: Learning, understanding and remembering. Belmont, Calif: Wadsworth, 1979.Google Scholar
  5. 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
  6. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gagne, E. D. Long-term retention of information following learning from prose. Review of Educational Research, 1978, 48, 629–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Graesser, A. C, Hauft-Smith, K., Cohen, A. D., & Pyles, L. D. Advanced outlines, familiarity, text genre and retention of prose. Journal of Experimental Education, in press.Google Scholar
  9. Graesser, A. C, Hoffman, N. L., & Clark, L. F. Structural components of reading time. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1980, 19, 135–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kalbaugh, G. L., & Walls, R. T. Retroactive and proactive interference in prose learning of biographical and science mate rial. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1973, 65, 244–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Postman, L., & Underwood, B. J. Critical issues in interference theory. Memory & Cognition, 1973, 1, 19–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew D. Cohen
    • 1
  • Arthur C. Graesser
    • 1
  1. 1.California State UniversityFullerton

Personalised recommendations