記憶痕跡度容の法則-下-単独再認法
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
In a previous paper, I reported the results of a set of two experiments (Exp. I and II) dealing with the problem of the relation between the processes of reproduction and recognition. These experiments showed that the process of reproduction would confuse the original trace probably by producing a new one and that this might be the reason why recognition contradicted reproduction at times. The following investigation is a continuation of the work started in the previous experiments.[Exp. III] This experiment studies the effect of the change in the time interval between reproduction and recognition upon recognition.Procedure: 1. Stimulus figures: a, a′, c (these frequently showed positive relationship in the previous experiments) and b (control). 2. Time interval: Reproduction experiment took place 30sec. after the observation of these figures and recognition experiment followed immediately after reproduction. 3. Recognition list: A few figures were added to the list used in Exp. I and II. 4. Subjects: College students who did not participate in Exp. I and II. Otherwise, the general procedure was the same as in Exp. I and II.Results: (8) In the above experiment, we found that there were twice as many cases of the negative relationship between reproduction and recognition as there were in the former experiment where the recognition experiment took place two week after the reproduction experiment. However, the cases of the positive relationship were still twice as many as those of the negative relationship (Cf: Table 12 in the Japanese text).[Exp. IV.] In this experiment, I tried to deter mine the effect of the change in the time interval between the initial observation of the stimulus figures and their recognition afterwards upon the memory trase.Procedure: 1. Stimulus figures: a, a′, c, b. 2. Subjects: Group I-5 students, Group II-3 students. 3. Time interval: With Group. II the recognition experiment took place immediately after observation, with Group I a week later. 4. Recognition list: Same as in Exp. III.The method of what I may call the "single recognition" was used. The subjects were asked first to select as many figures as they pleased from the recognition list, which, they thought, had some resembrance to the original figures they had observed (initial selection); secondly, to select from among these the ones which, they thought, had the greatest resembrance to the original (hereafter called the figures of the first rank); and thirdly, to select those which ranked second in the resembrance to the original (figures of the second rank)Treatment of the Data: I arranged the figures in the recognition list on the basis of the tendencies shown by the subjects in the reproduction experiment (Tables 14-16) and composed the data obtained with Group I and Group II, using these tables as frames of reference. In these tables, "S" signifies the standard on the original figures, to the right of "S" point, the curve shows the effect of "sharpening" while to the left it shows the effect of "levelling". The steps indicate the degrees of sharpening and levelling.Results: (9) The results of the initial selection by Group I and II are guite similar to each other. The curves showing the distributions of the selected figures have their modes in the position of "S" (Table 14). (10) With Group II, the figures of the first rank give the curve of distribution in which the mode coincides with the "S" point, while the curve for Group I is bimodal, having its two crests left and right of the "S" point (Table 15). (11) The distribution of the figures of the second rank for Group II shows no marked difference from that of the initial selection, on the other hand, that for Group I the mode coincides with the "S" point (Table 16).
- 公益社団法人 日本心理学会の論文