The replacing of items correctly recalled during paired-associate learning gave no advantage to Ss over Ss who received completely new items on each trial. Superficially, this result appeared to support all-or-none theory, but item analyses show item difficulty to be a confounding factor. The failure of the drop-out paradigms to provide critical tests of all-or-none predictions is discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
KristoffersenA. B.Repetition and paired-associate learning. Science, 1961, 134, 2036–2037.
2.
RockI.The role of repetition in associative learning. American Journal of Psychology, 1957, 70, 186–193.
3.
RockI.SteinfeldG.Methodological questions in the study of one-trial learning. Science, 1963, 140, 822–824.
4.
ThorndikeE. L.LorgeI.The teachers' word book of 30,000 words. New York: Columbia Univer. Press, 1944.
5.
UnderwoodB. J.Experimental psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1966.
6.
UnderwoodB. J.SchulzR. W.Meaningfulness and verbal learning. New York: Lippincott, 1960.
