Carlton T. James

A cognitive interpretation of negative transfer and forgetting of paired associates

A new interpretation of negative transfer and forgetting is presented, using concepts of storage and retrieval from memory. According to the interpretation given, one process in negative transfer is interference with the stroage of new items, produced by carryover of the encodings of stimuli and responses from earlier pairings. The other process in transfer, and the main process in forgetting, is interference with the retrieval process, produced mainly by the inclusion of the same stimuli in two retrieval systems. These ideas are used to interpret three empirical results. The first came from measurements of difficulty in two stages of paired-associate memorizing that were obtained for four paradigms of negative transfer. A second finding is based on a series of different retention tests given after interpolated learning in the four paradigms. And the third result consists of evidence that recall of two responses paired with the same stimulus is independent.

The reconstructive process in sentence memory

This report examines the role of reconstructive processes in the recall of simple sentences. As both recall and normal speech production are constructive activities, any characteristic patterns identified in speech production should influence the constructions produced in recall. Two characteristic patterns were specified: a preference for active over passive sentences, and a tendency to begin a sentence with the most salient noun contained in the semantic situation being communicated. Evidence was obtained for the operation of both biases. Recent sentence-memory hypotheses concentrate on the form in which information is stored, and none of these is consistent with the obtained results. In order to evaluate alternative storage hypotheses, the memorial processes that operate on the memory structure must be specified.

Theme and imagery in the recall of active and passive sentences

Image-value of subject and object nouns was systematically varied in studies of free recall of simple active and passive sentences. There was no general tendency for surface-structure subjects to be recalled more often than surface-structure objects, contrary to previous reports. If a theme is extracted from an isolated sentence, as has been proposed, the choice appears to be a function of nonsyntactic factors. It is suggested that the active sentences used, but not the passive sentences, generally receive a subjective organization similar to that expected on the basis of its surface-structure phrase marker.

The effects of complexity on confidence ratings in linguistic integration

Bransford and Franks (1971) introduced a paradigm for the study of linguistic integration. Their primary measure was subjects’ rated confidence in their responses. The present paper considers the appropriateness of this dependent variable, and concludes that the relation between sentence complexity and rated confidence is too small and unstable to justify the emphasis which confidence ratings have received. Further, certain differences between concrete and abstract sentences were obscured by a confidence analysis. The proportion of old responses is championed as a more appropriate dependent variable. Finally, it is shown that increasing the amount of specific memory necessarily decreases the size of the complexity effect.

Recognition memory for active and passive sentences

Data from three experiments are reported in which recognition memory for active and passive sentences is compared. The results consistently show no difference, a result taken to invalidate syntactic memory hypotheses (e.g., the kernel plus tag and markedness hypotheses) which assume that the stored representation of passive sentences is more complex than that of active sentences. Previous reports of superior recall of active sentences are attributed to a reconstructive bias. One form of propositional hypothesis and a verbatim hypothesis are consistent with the data.

The influence of prescriptive and subjective phrase markers on retrieval latencies

To investigate the effect of subjective (pause defined) and prescriptive (grammatically defined) phrase markers on subjective grouping, subjects were presented simple declarative sentences in which the subjective and prescriptive phrase markers were either the same or different. In the same condition a 2-sec pause was placed at the major syntactic boundary, while in the different condition the pause was inserted within a constituent. Retrieval latencies for words following probes in the sentence were influenced by grammatical structure and, to a lesser extent, by the pause. The results suggest that, while sentential organization may be influenced by inserting pauses, this influence is highly constrained by the sentence’s grammatical structure.

Vowels and consonants as targets in the search of single words

Ss searched four- and six-letter words typed in uppercase for predesignated target letters, Reaction times to vowel targets were faster than to consonant targets for both stimulus lengths; this was true whether or not the target was contained in the stimulus word. The results are interpreted to indicate that an early stage in word perception is the location of vowels, as proposed by Hansen and Rogers, 1968.

Paired-associate learning with homograph stimuli

Acquisition of a paired-associate list was compared for lists having adjective responses and either homograph or nonhomograph stimuli. The two sets of stimuli were equated for mean length, frequency, and image value. Acquisition of the list with homograph stimuli was significantly slower, a result consistent with Martin’s encoding variability hypothesis.

Scanning for presence in simple sentences is influenced by image value of nouns

Ss were asked to scan transitive (A-N-V-A-N) sentences for the presence or absence of probe word. It took longer to locate abstract subject (object) nouns than to locate concrete subject (object) nouns.