Robert L. Hudson

A quick screening test of competency to stand trial for defendants with mental retardation.

19 terms and concepts from evaluations of competency to stand trial of 55 defendants with mental retardation were rated to examine whether a quick screening test could be devised that would differentiate those who were judged competent or not competent. A multiple regression and discriminant analysis gave four items that yielded maximum predictability (R = .84): court strategy, plead, testify, and jury. Guilty, trial, and prosecutor were also significantly more difficult for those who were not competent than those who were.

The effects of intralist cues, extralist cues, and category names on categorized recall

Two experiments are reported which attempt to clarify a procedural problem of Hudson & Austin (1970) and provide support for the hypothesis that context words as recall cues serve to mediate category names. The results regarding the procedural problem of Hudson & Austin (1970) indicate that exposure to context words during recall trials does not artifactually increase recall for context groups. The hypothesis that context cues serve to mediate the category name was supported in Experiment II but not in Experiment I.

Effects of presentation and recall trials on clustering and recall

In Experiment I the pattern of presentation and recall trials was varied for five groups who received 40 related words. On common immediate postinput recall trials there were no differences between any groups on either recall or clustering. This included a group given 11 presentation trials followed by a recall trial and a group receiving an initial presentation trial, nine recall trials, a presentation trial and a final recall trial (Group 9R + P). Experiment II was an attempt to determine if a 9R + P group would be equal to a standard group on the final recall when unrelated words were used. The two groups did not differ significantly.

Association by contiguity: Clustering in free recall

Unrelated words were randomly paired then presented in a verbal discrimination (VD) task. After VD learning, the 24 words were used in a typical multitrial free recall (FR) situation. Analysis of clustering in FR revealed that contiguous presentation of words during VD learning induced Ss to recall the words together. Association by contiguity appears to be one determinant of clustering (organization) of output order in FR.

Part-whole transfer of a categorizable word list

The Ss learned a part list where the words could be placed into one of four Underwood & Richardson (1956) categories and were then transferred to the whole list containing all the words of the part list plus additional words from each category. One group was told prior to part list learning that the words could be categorized, and another group was never given this information. An additional control group was included to assess the effects of information, per se. The results of whole-list learning, which were in the predicted direction but generally nonsignificant, showed a slight superiority for the group receiving information over the group not receiving information.

Effects of Information and Cueing on Recall and Organization of a Categorizable Word List

Ss in the information-category name group were told words could be categorized and were given the category names as cues at each recall; Ss with information but no category names were told the words could be categorized but were exposed to the category names only one time, and the no-information group was given no indication the words could be categorized. The results indicated that groups with information but no category name and no information did not differ on number of words recalled or subjective organization but did differ on category clustering. Ss with information and category name exceeded the no-information group on words recalled and subjective organization as well as clustering. The results were discussed in terms of the implications for storage-retrieval systems.

Part-whole transfer of a taxonomic word list

Three groups of Ss were given a part-whole transfer task where the words were members of taxonomic categories. Information regarding the taxonomic nature of the words was varied. The information-before (IB) group was given this information prior to the part list, the information-between (IBe) group received it prior to the whole list, and the no-information (NI) group was never given any information. Two control groups were included which were given taxonomic words in part-list learning which were not included in the whole list, i.e., category content was irrelevant. The information-between/irrelevant (IBe/I) group was given information regarding the whole list prior to the whole list, and the no-information/irrelevant (NI/I) group was given no information at all. Basically, the results indicated that both the IB and IBe groups exceeded the NI/I and NI groups in word recall. They did not, however, differ between themselves, except on Trial 1 of the whole list when only “;old”; words recalled were considered. Implications of these results were discussed.

Effects of presentation, recall, and study trials on word recall of a highly structured list

Groups differing in the pattern of presentation, recall, and study trials were compared on common postinput recall trials for number of words recalled. The major hypothesis was that a highly structured list would result in differences where they had not been previously found. The hypothesis was not supported for either a group given no cuing or a group given cuing.

The effect on word recall when storage and retrieval cues differ

Ss were presented 32 stimulus words from the Underwood & Richardson (1956) norms over six presentation-recall trials. The independent variable was the trial of presentation of retrieval information in the form of category names. These were presented between presentation and recall on Trials 2, 4, or 6 for the three experimental groups. Two control groups were also used; one was presented the category information before recall trials started, and one was never presented the information. The major finding was a decreased recall on trials in which the information was presented. Also, category clustering increased on trials subsequent to the information trial, but number of words recalled did not differ from the control group on subsequent trials.