In a factorial design, it was shown that Ss produce more responses to their high-value area label than to their low-value area label in a continuous word-association task, where value importance was measured by the Allport-Vernon-Lindzey Study of Values. It was also shown that the commonality and number of responses decrease over time. Possible reasons for the failure to find a significant effect for associational fluency are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllportG. W.VernonP. E.LindzeyG.Study of values. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1960.
2.
BousfieldW. A.BarclayW.The relationships between order and frequency of restricted associative responses. J. exp. Psychol., 1950, 40, 637–643.
3.
BousfieldW. A.SamborskiG.The relationship between strength of values and the meaningfulness of value words. J. Pers., 1955, 23, 375–380.
4.
CoferC. N.ShevitzR.Word-association as a function of word-frequency. Amer. J. Psychol., 1952, 65, 75–79.
5.
FrenchJ.EkstromR.PriceL.Manual for Kit of Cognitive Factors. Princeton: Educational Testing Serv., 1963.
6.
JohnsonW.Studies in language behavior: I. A program of research. Psychol. Monogr., 1944, 56, No. 6 (Whole No. 255).
7.
NobleC. E.Meaningfulness and familiarity. In CoferC. N.MusgraveB. S. (Eds.), Verbal behavior and learning. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963. Pp. 76–119.
8.
PaivioA.SteevesR.Relations between personal values and imagery and meaningfulness of value words. Percept. mot. Skills, 1967, 24, 357–358.
9.
PaivioA.YuilleJ. C.MadiganS.Concreteness, imagery, and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns. J. exp. Psychol. Monogr. Suppl., 1968, 76, Part 2, 1–25.
10.
ReynoldsA. G.GardnerR. C.ABACUS (A frequency count program for language). Res. Bull. No. 55, Univer. Western Ontario, 1967.
