Effects of Non-Anticipation and Anticipation Procedures upon Paired-Associate Learning in Unmixed and Mixed List Designs
- 1 December 1964
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Psychological Reports
- Vol. 15 (3) , 795-801
- https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1964.15.3.795
Abstract
Two experiments compared verbal PA learning by the standard anticipation technique with learning by a non-anticipation method in which immediate confirmation O- correct responding was eliminated. Most previous investigations have found that learning by the latter procedure is superior to learning by the usual anticipation method. In Exp. I, which employed an unmixed list design, no differences in learning were obtained between the two methods at either of two levels of list difficulty. However, Exp. II, using the same materials in a mixed list design, showed superior learning of items presented by the non-anticipation method regardless of the difficulty of the list. The conflicting results of the two experiments suggest that evidence for superior verbal PA learning by the non-anticipation method may depend, at least in part, upon the list design employed.Keywords
This publication has 6 references indexed in Scilit:
- The influence of training procedure and other task variables in paired-associate learningJournal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1964
- Confirmation, correction, and contiguityJournal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1963
- Prompting and Confirmation Variables in Verbal LearningPsychological Reports, 1961
- Supplementary report: Prompting versus confirmation in paired-associate learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1960
- Mixed vs. unmixed lists in transfer studies.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1959
- Supplementary report: Processes underlying learning a single paired-associate item.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1958