Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The ability of mentally subnormal children to recognize previously presented visual or verbal stimuli was compared. In “like-modality” procedures they had to recognize words or pictures in the modality in which they had originally been presented. In “cross-modality” procedures the stimulus they had to recognize was in the opposite modality from that which had been used for the first presentation.

In every recognition test the items had to be recognized from among an equal number of novel stimuli. Cross-modality procedures resulted in higher recognition scores. The hypothesis is advanced that this could be accounted for by the necessary translation from one type of sensory image to another in the cross-modality trials, which might minimize over-generalization.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bartlett

F. C.

(1932). Remembering London.

Cox

D. R.

(1958). Regression analysis of binary sequences. J. Roy. Stat. Soc. (B) 20, 216–42 Example 3, p. 225.

Hermelin

O'Connor

(1960). Like-and cross-modality responses in normal and subnormal children. Quart. J. exp. Psychol. 12, 48–53.

House

B. J.

Zeaman

Orlando

Fisher

(1957). Learning and Transfer in Mental Defectives The University of Connecticut, Department of Psychology Progress Report No. 1.

Kent

G. H.

Rosanoff

A. J.

(1910). A study of association in insanity. Amer. J. Insan. 67, 37–96 317–90.

Kurz

K. H.

Hovland

C. I.

(1953). The effect of verbalization during observations of stimulus objects upon accuracy of recognition and recall. J. exp. Psychol. 45, 157–64.

Lashley

K. S.

Wade

(1946). The Pavlovian theory of generalization. Psychol. Rev. 53, 72–87.

Luria

A. R.

(1956). Problems of the Higher Nervous Activity of Normal and Abnormal Children. Moscow. Vol. I and II, 58.

Shorter Articles and Notes: Like and Cross Modality Recognition in Subnormal Children

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References