Memory for Sentences and Prose: Levels-of-Processing or Transfer-Appropriate-Processing?

Abstract

Four experiments were conducted in order to contrast the levels-of-processing perspective with the transfer-appropriate-processing perspective. Experiment 1 employed a within-groups design to contrast the effects of various types of questions at different positions on subjects' recognition of sentences. The results seemed to support the transfer-appropriate-processing perspective's predictions but were confounded by the form of design. Experiment 2 examined the same questions with a between-groups design, while Experiment 3 replicated Experiment 2 with the use of a free recall posttest. The results of both Experiments 2 and 3 seemed to support the predictions of the transfer-appropriate-processing perspective and disconfirm the predictions of the levels-of-processing framework. Experiment 4 extended the work to subjects' memory for paragraphs. The results of Experiment 4, however, did not match the pattern observed in Experiments 1–3 and, instead, seemed to bear out the predictions of the levels-of-processing perspective. The results are discussed in terms of the influence of experimental design, choice of study materials, choice of dependent variables, and their interaction.

References

Andre

Womack

(1978). Verbatim and paraphrased adjunct questions and learning from prose. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 796–802.

Baddeley

A. D.

(1978). Domains of recollection. Psychological Review, 85, 139–152.

Benton

S. L.

Glover

J. A.

Bruning

R. H.

(1983). Levels of processing: Effect of number of decisions on prose recall. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 382–390.

Bloom

B. S.

Englehart

M. D.

Furst

E. J.

Hill

W. H.

Krathwohl

D. R.

(1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: McKay.

Bransford

J. D.

Stein

B. S.

Vye

N. J.

Franks

J. J.

Auble

P. M.

Mezynski

K. J.

Perfetti

C. A.

(1982). Differences in approaches to learning: An overview. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 111, 390–398.

Bruning

R. H.

(1968). Effects of review and testlike events within the learning of prose material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 59, 16–19.

Craik

F. I. M.

(1977). Depth of processing in recall and recognition. In Dornic

(Ed.), Attention and performance VI (pp. 196–223). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Craik

F. I. M.

Lockhart

R. S.

(1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671–684.

Craik

F. I. M.

Tulving

(1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104, 268–294.

10.

Frase

L. T.

(1967). Learning from prose material: Length of passage, knowledge of results, and position of questions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 58, 266–272.

11.

Frase

L. T.

(1968). Effect of question location, pacing, and mode upon retention of prose material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 59, 244–249.

12.

Friedman

Rickards

J. P.

(1981). Effect of level, review, and sequence of inserted questions on text processing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 427–436.

13.

Glover

J. A.

Bruning

R. H.

Plake

B. S.

(1982). Distinctiveness of encoding and recall of text materials. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 522–534.

14.

Glover

J. A.

Plake

B. S.

Zimmer

J. W.

(1982). Distinctiveness of encoding and memory for learning tasks. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 189–198.

15.

Jacoby

L. L.

Craik

F. I. M.

Begg

(1979). Effects of decision difficulty on recognition and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 585–600.

16.

Jenkins

J. J.

(1979). Four points to remember: A tetrahedral model of memory experiments. In Cermak

L. S.

Craik

F. I. M.

(Eds.), Levels of processing and human memory (pp. 429–446). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

17.

Moeser

S. D.

(1983). Levels of processing: Qualitative differences or task-demand differences. Memory & Cognition, 11, 316–323.

18.

Morris

C. D.

Bransford

J. D.

Franks

J. J.

(1977). Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 519–533.

19.

Nelson

T. O.

(1977). Repetition and depth of processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 151–171.

20.

Palmere

Benton

S. L.

Glover

J. A.

Ronning

R. R.

(1983). Elaboration and recall of main ideas in prose. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 898–907.

21.

Postman

Thompkins

B. A.

Gray

W. D.

(1978). The interpretation of encoding effects in retention. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 681–706.

22.

Rickards

J. P.

(1976). Interaction of position and conceptual level of adjunct questions on immediate and delayed retention of text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 210–217.

23.

Rickards

J. P.

(1979). Adjunct postquestions in text: A critical review of methods and processes. Review of Educational Research, 49, 181–196.

24.

Rickards

J. P.

DiVesta

F. J.

(1974). Type and frequency of questions in processing textual material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 354–362.

25.

Rickards

J. P.

Hatcher

C. W.

(1977–78). Interspersed meaningful learning questions as semantic cues for poor comprehenders. Reading Research Quarterly, 13, 538–553.

26.

Schallert

D. L.

(1976). Improving memory for prose: The relationship between depth of processing and context. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15, 621–632.