Previous research has demonstrated quite conclusively that bizarre imagery has little influence on recall of paired associates. This experiment showed that bizarreness does facilitate recall, particularly retention over a 24-hr. period. Instructions to relate imagery with positive emotional reactions, however, did not facilitate either immediate or delayed retention of concrete word pairs. Results are discussed in terms of a cognitive elaboration hypothesis.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BowerG. H.Analysis of a mnemonic device. American Scientist, 1970, 58, 496–510.
2.
FurstB.The practical way to a better memory. New York: Fawcett World Library, 1957.
3.
HauckP. D.WalshC. C.KrollN. E. A.Visual imagery mnemonics: Common vs. bizarre mental images. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1976, 7, 160–162.
4.
NappeG. W.WollenK. A.Effects of instructions to form common and bizarre images on retention. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1973, 100, 6–8.
5.
PaivioA.YuilleJ. C.MadiganS.Concreteness, imagery, and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns. Journal of Experimental Psychology Monograph Supplement, 1968, 16 (1, Pt. 2), 1–25.
6.
SadallaE.LoftnessS.Emotional images as mediators in one trial paired associate learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1972, 95, 295–298.
7.
SenterR. J.HoffmanR. R.Bizarreness as a nonessential variable in mnemonic imagery: A confirmation. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1976, 7, 163–164.
8.
WollenK. A.WeberA.LowryD. H.Bizarre vs. interaction of mental images as determinants of learning. Cognitive Psychology, 1972, 3, 518–523.
