Response Guidance, Response-Term Similarity and Test Type in the Learning and Retention of Work Pairs.
AMERICAN INST FOR RESEARCH SANTA BARBARA CALIF
Pagination or Media Count:
It was hypothesized that 1 high cueing level would be more effective than low cueing, 2 the influence of cueing would be greater when easily confusable incorrect alternatives were present during training than when less easily confusable alternatives were present, 3 training with easily confusable alternative response terms would be more effective than training with less confusable alternatives when the criterion behavior required discrimination between the correct response term and the easily confusable alternatives. Both immediate and delayed test results bore out the first hypothesis. The second hypothesis was confirmed by comparisons made on the results of the test coming at the end of the acquisition session. The Third hypothesis was confirmed for the high and medium cueing levels but not for the low cueing level. It was also found that Ss who took recognition tests during training. It was concluded that prompting is more effective than anticipation in discrimination training, and that when high probability incorrect alternatives are presented, eliciting only the correct response is efficient training when the criterion behavior involves discrimination among the high probability alternatives. Author