Twenty-eight first graders were taught letter-sound correspondences according to massed and spaced formats. One group received a spaced format on i and massed format on e, and the other received a spaced format on e, and massed format on J. A paired associated format required children to produce the appropriate sounds in response to visually presented letters (e, m, s, c, i). Compared to the massed format, correct responses to the letter presented according to the spaced format were more frequent on the posttest (72% versus 38%), though less frequent during training (56% versus 74%). The findings extended the superiority of spaced presentations to younger subjects and academically relevant stimuli.
References
1.
CarnineD. W.Phonics versus look say: Transfer to new words. Reading Teacher, 1977, 30, 636–640.
2.
CarnineD. W.Two letter discrimination sequences: High-confusion alternatives first versus low-confusion alternatives first. Journal of Reading Behavior, 1980, 12, 41–48.
3.
CarnineD. W.Similar sound separation and cumulative introduction on learning letter sound correspondences. Journal of Educational Research, 1976, 69, 368–372.
4.
ColemanE. B.Collecting a data base for reading technology. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1970, 61, 1–23.
5.
GrassiJ. R.Effects of massed and spaced practice on learning in brain damaged, behavior disordered and normal children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1971, 4, 7–11.
6.
GreenoG.Paired associate learning with massed and distributed repetitions of items. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1964, 67, 286–295.
7.
HintzmanD. L.Theoretical implications of the spacing effect. In SolsoR. L. (Ed.), Theories in Cognitive Psychology: The Loyola Symposium. Potomac, MD: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1974.
8.
MeltonA. W.The situation with respect to the spacing of repetitions and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1970, 9, 596–606.
9.
PetersonL. R.WamplerR.KirkpatrickM.SaltzmanD.Effect of spacing presentations on retention of a paired associate over short intervals. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1964, 67, 286–295.
10.
ShaughnessyJ. J.ZimmermanJ.UnderwoodB. J.The spacing effect in the learning of word pairs and the components of word pairs. Memory and Cognition, 1974, 2, 742–748.
