Advertisement

Cognitive Styles and Differential Learning Capacities in Paired-Associate Learning

  • G. C. van der Veer
  • E. van Muylwijk
  • G. J. E. van de Wolde
Part of the Nato Conference Series book series (NATOCS, volume 5)

Abstract

In the last few years we have carried out several learning experiments on paired associates (v. Bolhuis & v. d. Veer, 1973; v. d. Veer, 1970), with stimuli with which our subjects were unfamiliar, while the responses were well known: the letters of the alphabet (except Q). Each task concerned the acquisition of 25 pairs presented visually by the use of slides and according to the anticipation method. After presentation of the stimulus alone (the “stimulus slide”), the subject was shown both stimulus and response combined into a single picture (the “response slide”). The group of stimuli used within a single experiment was always homogeneous in nature, e.g., braille symbols, semaphore flags, or Holzman inkblots.

Keywords

Cognitive Style Learning Style Response Competition Verbal Creativity Verbal Mediation 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bolhuis, J. v., & Veer, G. C. v. d. Mathematical models for grouped paired-associate learning tasks. In Proceeding of the Second Prague Conference on Psychology of Human Learning and Problem Solving. Prague: 1973.Google Scholar
  2. Bower, G. H. Stimulus sampling theory of encoding variability. In A. W. Melton & E. Martin (Eds.), Coding processes in human memory. New York: Wiley, 1972.Google Scholar
  3. Dam, G. v. Categories of interference and susceptibility to interference. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, State University of Utrecht, 1972.Google Scholar
  4. Jensen, A. R., & Rohwer, W. D. Jr. The Stroop color-word test: A review. Acta Psychologica, 1966, 25, 36–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Marshall, P. H., Chatfield, D. C., & Janek, E. J. The effects of natural language mediation on response recognition following paired-associate learning. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1975, 5, 411–412.Google Scholar
  6. Owens, J. M., Werder, P. R., & Marshall, P. H. A component analysis of natural language mediators obtained in paired-associate learning. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1974, 4, 512–514.Google Scholar
  7. Prytulak, L. S. Natural language mediation. Cognitive Psychology, 1971, 2, 1–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Sanders, M. S., & Dudycha, A. L. Prediction of learning speed on long paired-associate tests. The Journal of General Psychology, 1975, 93, 297–298.Google Scholar
  9. Veer, G. C. v. d. Mathematical learning models as tools for computer assisted instruction. In Proceedings of the International Federation for Information Processing world conference (Vol. 1). Amsterdam: 1970.Google Scholar
  10. Witkin, H. A., Moore, C. A., Goodenough, D. R. & Cox, P. W. Field-dependent and field-independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Research Bulletin 75–24. Princeton, New Jersey: Educational Testing Service, June 1975.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. C. van der Veer
    • 1
  • E. van Muylwijk
    • 1
  • G. J. E. van de Wolde
    • 1
  1. 1.Free UniversityAmsterdamNetherlands

Personalised recommendations