DOCUMENT RESUME 24 CG 006 424 Feb 71 42p. · ail 2f, gnatimal Amami 2in Short Versus Lena Term...
Transcript of DOCUMENT RESUME 24 CG 006 424 Feb 71 42p. · ail 2f, gnatimal Amami 2in Short Versus Lena Term...
ED 050 417
DOCUMENT RESUME
24 CG 006 424
AUTHOR Lavach, John F.TITLE The Effects of Emotional Arousal on Short Versus
Long Term Retention of Continuously PresentedInformation. Fina... Report.
INSTITUTION College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Va.SPONS AGENCY Office of Education (DHEW), Washington, D.C. Bureau
of Research.BURE&U NO DR-O-C-010PUB DAT, Feb 71GRANT 0EG-3-70-0010(010)NOTE 42p.
EARS PRICEDESCRIPTORS
EDRS Price MF-40.65 BC-$3.29*Arousal Patterns, Auditory Perceptif)n, ContinuousLearning, *Learning Processes, *Memory, PairedAssociate Learning, *Recall (Psychological),*Retention, Retention Studies, Stimulus Behavior
ABSTRACTPrevious research has indicated that for discretely
(paired associate) as well as continuously (sound-film) presentedinformation, high arousal during alguisition results in poorimmediate recall, but is characterized by a strong reminiscenceeffect. Low arousal learning results in better immediate recall withpoor retention. The hypothesis that high arousal during learningresults in increased long term retention, but poor immediate recall,was found tenable. Similarly, it was confirmed that low arouse'facilitates improved short term retention with a typical forgettingcurve. The implication of this study for the educator centers on are-examination of the arousal state of the learner during thelearning process. (Author)
f`-
Final ReportProject No. 03010
i11 Grant No. OEG 3-70-0010 (010)
cnuJ
-tae. 6-C- OM
17/1
THE EFFECTS OF EMOTIONAL AROUSAL ON SHORT VERSUSLONG TERM RETENTION OF CONTINUOUSLY PRESENTED INFORMATION
John F. LavachCollege of William and MaryWilliamsburg, Virginia 23185
'Februarys 1971
'Rio
U.S. DEPaTMRNT OFHEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
Office of EducationBureau of Reeearoh
t DIPAIll Nil N1 Or NI AO M. I Dlr. itTiON111 W10,00111
OFFICE OF I OlICAlIONtip DOCLAIN1 NO SUN Pt rliODuZiOILKACILT AS PRIVIL FROMM/ PIKSC,14 JROFIGANtit,:01i ORONA(iNO rT POiN1S OFWW OR MPON317AtiD DO NCI NICESLABIA PilPPF Wit OFriFit frf Kt OF FDI.7CANON NO Sr. ON ON Kit it',
0
Final ReportProject No. 03010
Grant No. OBG 3-70-001 (010)
THE EFFECTS OF EMOTIONAL AROUSAL ON SHORT VERSUSLONG TTRM RETENTION OF CONTINUOUSLY PRESENTED INFORMATION
John F. LavachCollege of William and MaryWilliamsburg, Virginia 23185
February, 1971
The research reported herein was performed pursuant to a grantwith the Office of Education, U.S. Dep&rtment of Health.Education, and Welfare. Contractors undertaking such projectsunder Government sponhorship are encouraged to express freelytheir professional judgment in the conduct of the project.Pointe of view or opinions stated do not, therefore, nee:ear:tar-ily represent official Offioe of Eduoation ostUon or policy.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OFHEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
Office of EducationBureau of Research
2
,USTRAGT
ail 2f, gnatimal Amami 2in Short Versus Lena Term
Detention of Continaouslx Presented Information
Purpose,
Method'
The purpose of this investigation was to
determine if emotional arouse.% effects short
versus long term retention of Rurally presented
continuous information.
Previous research has indicated that for
discretely (paired associate) as well as
continuously (sound-iilm) presented information,
high arousal during acquisition results in poor
immediate recall, but is characterized by a
strong reuiniscenco effect. Low arousal
learning results in better immediate recall
with poor retention. The investigator restricted
this study to an analysis of the auditory
sense and the arousal retention phenomenon.
It was hypothesized that if taped information
is preceded by a eimulu's 'word of high or low
emotional arousal value, as measured by
galvanic skin response (GSR) and heart beat,
learning and subsequent retention would be
effected.
fifty subjects in five retention groups
individually listened to a taped 20 minute
leoturoi Emotion arousing words preoeded
tiii)
3
FindingsandConclusionsl
selected passages while tho sub gets galvanic
skin response and heart beat were recorded.
Subjects were tested for retention over the
critical passages.
The hypothesis that high arousal during
learning results in increased long term
retention, but poor immediate reca'1, was
found tenable. Similarly, it was confirmed
that low arousal facilitates improved short
term retention with a typical forgetting
curve. It is postulated that underlying the
arousal retention phenomenon may be some inter-
action between the orienting reflex and con-
sofliAation hypothesis.
The implication of this study for tho educator
centers on a re-examination of the arousal
state of the learner during tho learning prooess.
Also the educator must develop evaluative
procedures which are effeot:ys-in:iapping either
short term retentions long term retention, or
both. Perhaps the most important implication
of the arousal retention phenomenon is in its
application to individualized instruction
where control aver arousing stimuli may be
carefully monitored.
(iv)
4
CONTENTS
ABSTRACT iii
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES vi
A. PROBLEM AND OBJECTIVES 1
B. PROCEDURES 6
C. RESULTS 12
D. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 19
APPENDIXES
A. SAMPLE GSR RECORDING SHOWING SUBJECTSRESPONSE TO EACH OF EIGHT STIMULUS WORDS 27
SAMPLE CARDIOTACHOMETER RECORDING SHOWINGSUBJECTS RESPONSE TO EACH OF BIGHT STIMULUSWORDS 30
B. POST TEST 34
BIBLIOGRAPHY 35
5
LIST OF TABLES
I. Raw Scores for Recall Groups 8
II. Retention Scores for High Arousal Groups 10
III. Retention Scores for Low Arousal Groups 11
IV. Analysis of Varismce of Post-Test Scores 12
V. t - values for high arousal and low arousal subjectsin five retention intervals 13
VI. Summary of Duncan's Range Test Applied to RetentionScores of High Arousal Group 15
VII. Summary of Dunoan's Range Test Applied to RetentionScores of Low Arousal Group 17
(v)
6
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
Figure 5.
Figure 6.
Figure 7.
LIST OF FIGURES
Interaction effect of arousal and time on recall 2of paired associates. (After Kleinsmith and Kaplan, 1963)
Predicted effect of high arousal versus low arousalon long term versus short term retention on con-tinuously presented information 5
Mean number of correct responses for high arousal(HA) and low arousal (LA) subjects in five retentiongroups 18
Schematic representationof memory (after Krech,Memory
Schematic representationof memory (after nseoh,Independent Aemory
Sohematic representationof memory (after Krech,Memory System
Proposed model for interaction of orientingreflex And consolidation hypothesib 25
of theoretical organization1969). Two -Stage Successive
22
of theoretical organization1969). Two-Stage
23
of theoretical organization1969). Three-Stage
24
(vi)
7
A. Problem and ObAectives
Several, studies of the relationship between arousal, as
measured by galvanic skin response (GSR), and retention of
information learned during such aroused states have been relent -
ly conducted. Findings of these studies suggest that low arousal
learning results in better short term retention than long term,
while high arousal produoes the opposite effect; i.e., poor
short term retention with improved long term retention. Rein-
forcement, Hebb's reverberating circuits, and the orienting
reflex are some of the constructs which have been postulated
to explain the arousal-retent!.on phenomenon.
KlOnsmith and Kaplan (1963) reported that in a study of
forty-eight individually run subjects learning a list of eight
paired-associate word - digits such as kiss -2, vomit-4, and
dance-6, low arousal during acquisition resulted in increased
short term memory while high arousal resulted in inoreased
long term memory. Each subjf,ct was presented with eight paired-
associate word-digits while simultaneously his GSR's were re-
corded. A decrement in'skin resistanoe within four seconds
of the onset of the stimulus was the indicator of arousal. Er.oh
of the eight paired-associate pairs was'thqn rank-ordered into
either the four "high arousal learning," or four "low arousal
learning" groups. Six subgroups were tested for retention'
immediate recall, two minutes, twenty minutes, forty-five min-
utes? one day, and one week. For retention of low arousal
paired-assooi,Ates, a typioal forgetting curve was plottedt
while :or high arousal pairs, subjeots demonstrited a high
reminisoeno ffeot as shown in figure 1.
50-40 -
PercentCorrect 30
20-
10 -
03 20 45 1440 10,180Time in minutes (Log Scaling)
FIG. 1
Inleraction effect of arousal and tine on recall of paired
associates. (After Kleinsmith and Kaplan, 1963)
2
In a similar study, Kleinsmith and Kaplan (1964) examined
the 010,9 phenomenon using Elk nonsense syllables having zero
association value. These were paired as in thu previous study
with six individual digits. Each of the thirty-six subjects
first saw the nonsense syllable alone for Sour seconds followed
by the same nonsense syllable and a single digit. Arousal was
measured by GSR deflection and retention was examined over two
minutes, twenty minutes, and one week. Findings imUcate that
for immediate recall, digits paired with low arousal nonsense
syllables were retrieved four times more often than digits,
paired with high arousal nonsense syllables. However, reten-
tion of high arousal nonsense syllable-digit pairs increased
100% at twenty minutes and 200% at one week.
Butter (1969) replicated the Kleinsmith and Kaplan inveet-
igations and corroborated their findings; paired-aesooiates
learned under low arousal resulted in better short term reten-
tion and paired-assooiates learned under high arousal resulted
in better long term retention. In an additional investigation
9
examining the relationship between arousal and concreteness-
Imagery, Butter frond an additional effect. High concreteness-
imagery nouns were associated with low arousal and poor long
..7erw reteItien, while low concreteness-imagery nouns were
associated with high arousal and increased long term retention.
The application of these findings to a classroom situation.
Is not immediately apparent because the studies cited were con-
cerned with discretely presented information while classroom
instruction is typically characterized by continuously pre-
sented information as in lecture, film, etc. In an attempt
to determine whether the same phenomenon ::olds for a classroom
environment, Levonian (1967) studied arousal level and subsequent
retention in eighty-three driver-education students who watched
a ten-minute traffic safety film containing scenes which would
generate high arousal. Recording GSR's while the film was
shown, the experimmtors, with the aid of a computer, analyzed,
the subject's GSR to each of the 16,080 frames of the film.
A fifteen item yes-no retention test was admi-istered after
the film was shown and again, unannounced, one week later.
ResultA suggested that for continuously prese0eainformation,
as with discretely presented information, subjects forgec
ma ;erial learned under low anneal and experience r-miniscence
foe information learned under conditions of high arousal.
Levonian maintains that there are significant implications
to education conoening the potentiality of these findings.
Educators, he claims, are interested in long term retention,
but their meaanres are usually of the short term variety.
Here the implication is if student t outperforms student B on
10
4
a short term test, it is possible that an opposite effect could
be expected over a longer period of time if the arousal-reten-
tion hypothesis holds. It may be possible, therefore, for
an instructor to precede highly critical information which
must be retained with an appropriately selected vocabulary
in order to induce an arousal state. Similarly, an instructor
could present such highly critical information only wizen an
aroused state is experienced by the subject, whatever its cause.
In the preceding utudies, information was presented to the
subject primarily through the modality of vision. Still un-
explored is the sense of audition, a highly important channel
of sensory receptica in the instructional-communication process.
It is the purpose of this study to re-examine the Levonian
findings for continuously presented information and, further,
to analyze the relationship between emotional arousal and short
versus long term retention of aurally presented information.
It is hypothesized that for the conditions stated above, high
arousal during acquisition will be marked by a strong remin-
iscence effect while low arousal during acquisition, the op-
posite will be true; that is, a typical forgetting..curve will
be observed. Diagrammatically the hypotheses may be represented
as in figure 2.
11
5
iiTCH LOWALOUSAL IMMEDIATE DELAYED
STIMULUS RECALL RECALL
WORD
HIGH LOWLOW IMMEDIATE DELAYEDAROUSAL RECALL RECALL
FIG. 2
Predicted effeot of high arousal .eraus low arousal onlong term versus ehort term retention of oontinuouslypresented information
40
12
6
B. Proceiure
Su7)jects, after having been informed that the purpose of
this study was to measure physiological reactions to auditory
stimuli, and that they would receive a full report and explan-
ation at the conclusion of the investigation, were audiometric-
ally tested. After an initial ton - minute period curing which
the subject's GSR and heart-beat were permitted to stabilize,
he t'as informed that for the next one minute a recording of the
alpheet would be played. This permitted the subject to adjust
to auditory stimulation bC'Nre the actual continuous informa-
tion was presented. A taped 32cture of approximately 20 minutes,
recorded by a professional radio announcer, wao played for each
of the fifty individual, randomly selected undergraduate and
graduate students4at the College of William and Mary. The
l.cture, 'consisting of continuously presented faotual informa-
tion from a United States Supreme Court decision, contained
selected critical passages to be tested for retention. Preceding
each of these segments, a word judged in previous studies to
have high or low arousal value was presented. The words
selected were vomit, rape, kisa, dance, swim,.money, exam,
and love. The experimentor simultaneously listened through a
duplicate set of earphones and was aware of the presentation
of the high or low arousal term to the subject. At that point
the subject's GSR was recorded by finger eleotrodes over a four
second period while the cardiotachometer made a graphical
representation of heart-beat. This procedure was repeated for
the duration of the tape, resulting in the pairing of high and
low arousal words with the presentation of faotual information
13
associated with this event. The subject,R GSR's were then
ranked from high to low, tid were the results of the cardio-
tachometer. Samples of each are appended at A. *
Subjects, having been randomlj assigned to one of five
recall groups, were then examined for retention of the critical
information. An eight item fill-in questionnaire, with items
appearing in the same order as they were presented on the tape,
was adminiAtered to Group 1 immediately after the acquisition
session; Grol!p 2, one hour later; Group 3, at a one day interval;
Group 4, at one week; and Group 5 at one month. Groups 2, 3, 4,
and 5 were not told of the intent to test their retention.
The percent of items correotly recalled for each of the exper-
imental conditions were recorded, 4 copy of the examination
is appended at B.
*A.
* Although samples of GSR and cardiotaohometrio reports areappended, the latter was found to be an ineffective measureof arousal and the results were not included in the analysis
of data.
N...
.ft,
TABLE I
Raw
§2grat
or
Recall,
Groups
8
Immediate
gahltgl
A9.2.
Uti±
01
12
231
01
o
HA-
43
32
21
44
LA+
LA-
12
34
56
78
10
33
43
23
42
2
11
01
21
10
22
clean
(1.2)
f (2.9)
(2.9)
(1.1)
Ogg
Ham
1 1 3 3 1
2 1 3 2 2
3 2 2 ,.
..1.: 3
4 2 2
K o 4 1 3
6 2 2 1 3
7 2 2 3 1
8 2 2 3 1
9 1 3 2 2
10 1 3 2 2
:Atan
(1.4)
(2.6)
(2.1)
(2.0)
9T
(TeC) (6'o) (toz) (60 wiew
C T Z Z OT
ft o z z 6 C I 2 Z 9 C T Z Z Z
ft o C z z ?
C T T
fr a C T ft C T T C C
Z Z 7. Z Z
Z Z Z Z T
1. 144t1014 .5715
( 9° I) (TZ)
Z Z Z
Z Z C
C \ I I Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z
Z Z Z
- C I C
I C Z C Z
°(6T) Inelq
OT 6 9
9 5
76514 "4-76
(0°Z) (0°Z) (0°C) (0°T) treew
Z Z C T OT
Z Z C I 6
I C 0 8
0 ft T Z
C I C T 9
z z z z 5 z z C ft Z Z I C
C T C 1. Z
C I C t I
-YI +VI :W +VH 1717 TO-
6
(p4uoo) I Huta
T§
10
TABLE II
Retention Scores fgt High Arousa Groups
Sul' i a gji Number 1 2 1 14- d
1 0 1 1 2 2
2 1 1 1 2 2
3 1 2 1 1 3
4 2 2 1 2 1
5 2 0 2 2 1
6 3 2 1. 2 2
7f
1 2 1 2 2
8 0 2 0 3 2
9 1 1 1 1. 2
10 0 1 1 2 2
Z X 11' 14 10 19. 19
ZX2
21 24 12 39 39
n 10 1) 10 10
1.1 1.4. 1.0 ; .9 1.9
17
11
TABLE III
Betentioa Scores fu Low Aroui_v.kprquos,
agNect Number 1 , 2 4 1
1 3 3 1 1 2
2 3 2 1 3 2
3 4 1 2 1 1
4 3 3 2 2 0
5 2 1 2 2 1
6 3 1 1 2 0
7 3 3 4 41
8 4 3 3 2 1
9 2 2 2 2 0,
10 2 2 2 2 1
EX 29. 21 20 18 9
EX2 89 52 48 36. 13
n 10 10 10.
..... 10..:,.' 10
2.9 2.1 2.0 1.8 .9
18
12
C. Results
The data presented in Tables I through III were analyzed
by analysis of variance. Tables IV summarizes the results,
TABLE IV
Analysis a Variance a Post-Test Scores
Source, SS df M3
Arousal Level 4.00 1 4.00 3.33 .05
Retention Interval 4.40 4 1.10 .91 NS
Arousal Level 23.60 4 5.90 4.91 .05
X Retention Interval
Within 50.30 40 1.2
Total 82.30 49
the analysis of variance of recall scores showed the Arousal
1,,,vel X Retention Interval interaction to be statistically
significant (F=4.91, P(.05). The main etfe4t of arousal level
was also significant (F=3.33, P(.05), while the main effect of
the retention interval was not significant (F=.91). The sig-
nificant interaotion is attributable to the fact that for
immediate recall the critical information preceded by a low.40
arousal stimulus word results In signifiCantly superior recall
than that associated with information following high arousal
stimuli.
Similarly, the low significance of the retention interval
may be explained with the same argument. That is, as time
passes, a typical forgetting curve would be anticipated.
However, under arousal conditions, the reminiscence effect
seems to counter the typical forgetting curve with the result
19
13
being increased long term memory under one set of conditions,
and increased short term memory under the other.
As may be seen in Table V, low arousal subjects tested
immediately after the acquisition session remembered almost
three times as much critical information as high arousal
subjects. Over time, however, recall of critical information
associated with low arousal conditions displays a characteristic
forgetting curve until after thirty days the high arousal subjects,
although experiencing some forgetting, remember twice as much
as their low arousal counterparts. Therefore, after a one
month period there io a complete reversal of recall character-
istics, with high arousal acquisition conditions resulting in
etatistically significant (t=3.70, P<.01) gains.
TABLE V
ti - values for high arousal and low arousal subjectsin five retention
Source
intervals
AL 1 P
High Arousal(Low Arousq. 9 4.39 (.01
Immediate Recall
High Arousal(Low Arousal 9 2.33 (.05
One Hour
High Arousal(Low Arousal 9 2.61 (.05
One Day
High Arousal>Low Arousal 9 .43 NS
One Week
High Arousal>Low Arousal 9 3.70 (.01
Ono Month
20
14
Based on the hypotheses stated, it was predicted that the high
arousal p'oup would outperform the low arousal group at thirty
days, r-Nersing the pattern found at immediate recall. Sim-
ilarly, it would be argued that at one week the high arousal
group should begin to show greater recall while the low arousal
group should begin to show a strong forgetting effect. This
was corroborated by a difference in mean scores which was not
significant, Im.43.
Retention scores for each of the fifty subjects in the high
arousal versus low arousal groups were next examined through
the application of Dunoans Range Test, the summary of which
appears in Tables VI and VII.
,s '1%.
21
15
TABLE VI
Summary of Duncan's Range Test
Applied to Retention Scores of Nigh Arousal groan
Means Difference P
30 Day vs 1 Week 1.9-1.9 0 NS
30 Day vs 1 Day 1.9-1.0 .9 .05
30 Day vs 1 Hour 1.9-1.4 .5 NS
30 Day vs Immediate 1,.9-1.1 .8 ,05
1 Week vs 1 Day 1.9-1.0 .9 .05
1 Week vs 1 H011. 1.9-1.4 .3 NS
1 Week vs Immediate 1.9-1.1 .8 .05
1 Day vs 1 Hour 1.0-1.4 .4 NS
1 Day vs Immediate 1.0-1.1 .1 NS
1 Hoar vs Immediate 1.4-1.1 :3 ..:,.. NS
22
16
Analysis of the data in Table VI reveals that both group
4 and .5 retained significantly more than groups 1 and 3, but
were not themselves significantly different. Group 2 did
not differ signiricantly from groups 1, 3, 4, and 51 while
groups 1 and 3 were not significantly different.
Similarly, for conditions of acquisition under low arousal,
as presented in Table VII, the following results were obtainoda
c'oup 5 retained significantly less than all other low arousal
retention groups, 4, 3, 2, and 1. Group 4 did not differ
significantly from ,soups 2 and 1, but did differ from group 3,
while groups 1 and 2 were significantly different.
23
17
TABLE VII
Summary, of Puncanss Range Test
Applied to ReUntion Scores of Low Arousal Group
Source Means Difference P
.05
.05
.05
.05
30 Day vs 1 Week
j0 Day vs 1 D2y
30 Day vs 1 Hour!
30 Day vs Immediate
.9-1.8
.9-2.0
.9-2.1
.9-2.9
.9
1.1
1.2
2.0
1 Week vs 1 Day 1.8-2.0 .2 NS
1 Week vs 1 How. 1.8-2.1 .3 NS
1 Week vs Immediate 1.8-2.9 1.1 .05
1 Day vs 1 Hour 2.0-2.1 .1 NS
1 Day vs Immediate 2.0-2.9 .9 ,
.... .:,,,
.05
1 Hour vs Immediate 2.1-2.9. .8 .05
24
18
Examination of the data presented in the foregoing tables
suggests that there are significant differences in retention
of factual information as a function of arou6s1. High arousal
subjeots tested at one month and one week, While not signifi-
cantly differing from one another, retened more than subjects
tested immediately and at one day. Conversely, for the low
arousal group after one month, subjects in that retention group
remember significantly less than members of all other groups.
Figure 3 shows this relationship.
4.
3
Meanwords 2
recalled
1
FIG. 3
110'.Immediate 1 hour 24 hours 168 hours ?20 hours
1 2 '3 5
RECALL GROUPS
Mean number of correct responses for high arousal (HA) and
low arousal (LA) subjects in five retention groups
25
19
D. Conclusions and Recommendations
The results of this investigation are interpreted aA sup-
porting the hypothesis that for continulusly presented infor-
mation, forgetting occurs under low arousal conditions while
a strong reminiscent effect is observed if acquisition is
accomplished under high arousal conditions. Although substant-
isting the predictions of the arousal hypothesis, the data alone
do nothing to further clarify the origin of the arousal reten-
tion phenomenon. That is, the data may still be interpreted
along a reinforcement frame of reference, Hebb's cell assemblies,
consolidation hypothesis, or the orienting reflex. Even though
the possible emergence of the arousal retention phenomenon under
classroom conditiortu is not explained, some empirical conclusions
seem warranted.
For example, it ix, apparent from the research described herein,
which corroborates the findings of arousal retention hypothesis
and discretely presented information, that educators must
re-examine their priorities in any given acquisition session.
If long term memory or recall ability is more important than
short term, then care must be exercisedto
arousal state in the learner' prior to the presentation of
information, or present such information only when the learner
is in such an arousal state regardless of its cause. Conversely,
if short'term recall is more important, as it may be in some
oiroumstanoes, then high arousal may interfere with effective
short term performance.
Another conolusion of this rosearch is that educators must
26
"20
recognize the necessity of considering measures of delayed
performance in their studies of learning. The significant
recall ability of high arousal subjects in this study testifies
to the importance of such metl'ods which, although are effect-
ively employed for immediate reoall, may not be as effective
for delayed recal:L.
Finally, for many 3,:arning situations educators are inter-
ested in long term retention, but their measures are usually
of short term variety. Here the implication is if Student A
outperforms Student B on a short term test, it is possible that
an opposite effect could be observed over a longer period of
time if the arousal retention hypothesis holds.
As indicated earlier, the data do not clarify the philosop-
foal differences which exist between theorists espousing rein-
forcement theory versus some other approach. It appears to
this investigator that a combination of variables affect the
arousal retention phenomenon. First, the orienting or "what
is it" reflex as described by Pavlov is elicited. This assumes
it number of physiological reactions which facilitate the flow
of information to the individual and prepareshiff for responding.
With increased attention or vigilance, the subject focuses his
attention more acutely to the external environment. Perhaps
the consolidation hypothesis could then be postulated to
account for differences in short term versus long term reten-
tion. Information entering through the sense modalities begin
a short term meaQry process which is instrumental in initiating
the s.3. and phase of long term retention. If consolidation
27
4117.1.9...
21
could be enhanced, then long term re.uention would be facilitated
as per Figure 4 in what has been termed the two stage successive
memory model. It may be that with the increased vigilance
brought about by the orienting reflex, more information entering
the nervous system due to neurological facilitation, permits
this consolidation. Such consolidation from short term to
long term memory, however, takes time because of the hypothes-
ized electrochemical nature of short term memory and the bio-
chemical nature of long term memory.
Even if the two stage independent memory model shown in
Figure 5 or the three stage system in Figure 6 is accepted,
the same basic egplanation shown in Figure 7 holds.
28
SENSEORGANS
L
SHORT-TERMMEMORY
LONG-TERMMEMORY
22
BEHAVIOR
Two-Stago Successive Memory
FIG. 4
Schematic representation of theoretical OWitlizationof memory (after Krech, 1969)
29
SENSEORGANS
LONG-TERMMEMORY
SHORT-TERMMEMORY
23
BEHAVIOR
BEHAVIOR
Two-Stage Independent Memory
FIG. 5;,.
Schematic representation of theoretical organizationof memory (after Kreoh, 1969)
30
SENSEORGANS
SHORT-TERMMEMORY-A
24
SHORT-TBRMMEMORY-B
LONG-TERMMEMORY
BEHAVIOR
BEHAVIOR
Three-Stage Memory System
FIG. 6
Schematic representation of theoretical organization
of memory (after Kreoh, 1969)
Al
HIGHAROUSAL
RECALL
ORIENTINGREFLEX
INCREASEDVIGILANCE
25
LONG-TERMMEMORY
RECALL
LONG -TERMMEMORY
IC
SHORT-TERMMEMORY
*
NEUROLOGICALFACILITATION
MOREINFORMATION
ENTERS
FIG. 7
Proposed model for interaction o: orienting reflex andconsoliultion k;)othesis
32
26
In summary, this investigation supports the arousal reten-
tion hypothesis for continuously presented information and
several recommendations have been made concerning relevance to
education. At this point, the experimentor suggests some avenues
of research which may help to further understand this phenomenon
and aid in its implementation.
(1) If a stimulus serves to arouse one subject and
not another, then it would appear that the
apOication of the arousal retention hypothesis
should be studied with individualized instruction
techniques.
(2) If an arousing stimulus is independent of
emotion qualitatively, then various types of
stimuli, such as olicks, sounds, colorc, etc.,
should be studied in an attempt to further
understand the role of the orienting reflex.
33
27
Appendix A
Sample GSR RecordingShowing Subjects. Response toEach of Fight Stimulus Words *
0 2
0 lb.
0 20 1...%
0 2
0 I.
0 2
0 I.,.
.
1
- - _I.1
i
I
7 '....., ismII..
_1
!
_
..
,
r 1
,
1_ ( ( )
Base Level
Stimulus I
* Recordings. ade on Marietta Recording GSR Apparatus69A-12-13R
34
28
0 M.
_
I _.--1
._.
_...It
h
__. .
0 :.
0 IN
. _
.
0 i
.
0 IN IN
__.
1---- ,;--..., ..
! r 1111-4
1Mill
:_i
..._ i1
.____ ..__. _1 N
- -- - - -.
J t_ n o o 1 (MUSTRAK RINTED IN U.S.A. STYLE 11-111115_ 13_
Stimulus 2 and 3
0 IN 0 IN b...
0 ItI
.
0 i0 ON
0 i0 It
.
. ,
.
. . . 1 I
1 . I --.____. ___1_ I 1
ti
____ I
.
r 7III.
i."....."-......-"''''.1.'......1,. -.
h__. . _ ..
...;....-4..............-At-.."..'-'..".....".".=...- 1. .
IIN
I I --II
t- ,. r c ;
' __, _, I_L ! 1
r----i i . .
t .____
, ,
in1- _l_...... c -._ 1 i i
I
71.
n ] . 6 N. _ . . . - - t T_ I i 7 I- .. _. .. _ _ _ _ _ _ _
I to t t t ( I t t.'PINTAS U ..4 AISLE N WIMPS
stimulus 4
35
0
0 Z
0 IN".
29
0
A
0 0 n n a JAI n/HUNTED 114 "STVLE H0 0 ( C) n o n 0 . 0 r) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
co 0
Stimulus 5, 6, and 7
0
Z
I
I 1 -I(
A-N
i 1 T I
_ __ I_..4. in to r: '''' .. '''t 1
cof I I .1 :
. I .CI
; ') 1) 7, 0 } 0 0 ) 0 ( ) ( I 0 0 c ) 0 0 0 C) 0 a. 0 0 C; f) 0 0 f. . . . . - -.... ......._ ---- !IL:STALK PAibillE0 114 U.-S.A. .1.IC Tisfi:S1101________ _________a___._,N, j
Stimulus 8
36
aampla cardiotachoajer RQQ_Prding-Showinr :Response to
Z5101 Q Biaht Stimulus Words *
30
wsnPS3 90GS
II 11111111 '
1
[r7II`
; ,1 1 I t
----f--',-0 ! , l I
1,--7IIII
II i
III Iil7 "ih I.
,1 1
1 1 0 i I,
hH 11ii
1
-I.
IHIICI
)
1
r 11 II
i 1J,
1 .
i 1
H
1
,,,
i; .
1 1
I 1 , riiiITS-II
HIil H11 .11III
r 1
71 F Ili! 1
'11 I i 1 j
1
1
-t--I--
II L.1111 ,,,-r --r11 H
, li;' _,-,--17+
I,I;i I,1
I 1 H1 11
11111._±
I. I i
rr i1.i._i_
rti !III'I!!
l' I 11 iH
, ,
iliL III_L ,
1 'I1 11111
h 1
1
.
1
IH:f-r-1 ,
(IL, ;
%i,,,
'1 : '' !
1 i 1,.1-1 I
1
1 K.
-..1 i
1
i 1J tit-1
t iri.1 i!! I ,I
1W !h.T.i_ t i t
I : 1. 1 I
L L.1 ,! i F..... 101111 i
ii1/1
1
1,.'.;.(ii.i r. i 1 I --r 'LI 1 1 }';11 4 . C'
1 .
_i_
_ Iiif 1
I
t
1
.,, 1.4.ii,,,i:, ,,..
1..Niikw
,,i; , ,,_1 fti ,,, ji.11,
nli
,,:,,
.LL___11
.11,
H!;I..( '.
., ,
1
,
lil,, .
Id III , -1 1 IlL,,,
f ij1Lih
1Ii--4 'Ill:Iii
.
,IF 1 il, , 1
ihri.,.,U
- LiJ :, .1 If '
Hi.,!1 ,
)
, .,'1 ,
'
1
I
1lir! 1,1i li;1,11
11;1 1.111
i
I 111 L, 1
1
'H4_,_
111
/-T,II. 1 ;
t 11
f
,1
1 111
i
1 ' i
--L-i.111-III11
I-
II 1 i' . .1
;iltr,,,.1:.
1.1
1 1 II 01+ 1 1
"1
1
0-1
iI
ii[k 'j4H11 ,. II11
1 1
11.Ili'1 1LLL.L.1111 1111
1 L 1!1'
Stimulus 1 and 2
* Although appended, the cardiotachometric reports did notprovide an effective measure of arousal and the resultswere not included in the analysis of data.
'Y'Sql NI 3CIVIN 9054Z'01+1 1:JVHD
to
`111 `17Z ODV3IHD 'OD ON111301S '1-1
31
! 1 '.
7 1-7i
1 L .4_,..i i
_L.'.. ' ;
-,--L, I t
i
;r
I.II i-2 i ti
) I : I1
I
1 i 11111
1I 1 i1 I
1 V I
4 i 1 4
.hi
i
4 ' i11 011 '1 I
1 I
1.Ilihi1---1-1 ;
1 1
1
, ,1
11 p ' '! 4
I r .
i...
11
1
1l , i ' t
;1 MM1111111 i I
j_l_
i___4-i !
1 i
'1
I 1
,
.Li____i___.____i;t1
iL! ' '
_._II I ?
.:.I j I 1 1 I I 1
1
4 I
f
'-. 'I i
,1 ' [ '
! 1
i
_II _I_
it
Lj 1 1 ! 1._ i
1,
1_}. i1 ! '2'i 14 i 1,
I 'H. i HI., , . I
1 1 i
,1-_i1
1
, 11 i I i
! '1f.1..!.
--; -I --'
WI't i '1---,--/. -
i
1
1
1
r
1
1
11111=1111111
;
1
I /
1
1
1±
' :
i0 1
,
1 1
-, r ,..
1
W1r 1
1
1,
1 i;t I
1
1
I
1-1:1 '1 '11 1
/ 1r ' i :i ' I
I
1 I 1
1 i-,.,_i,,i ii,
1
i ,,
I 1 I, 1 , 1UI
--t,
,,, ;; ,;,1
Li! 1- i
Stimulus 3 and 4
38
V
OSVOlf-10 ."00 ON11:1301S 'U '0
32
f
--..i .,
''
._
1
4 1
I ] I I
: ' I 1 I 4
I. 1
1
I
ii
, -1--
1
I
;
f
I i 1.
II
i.
;
Il
I
i '
111177171i 1 1- I. !
i i 1
1, 1IIIli:
i I, ! 1
' i
1
H
1 :
i 4
1 4
llilI I . 1
,
II!!H;
1
HI" 1 11 :
i 11
1 ki
I
1
I
71
1
I-
1
l' I
I
1
1
1
-'
' 4 1
[i'' 1
,
2,. t 1
r 11
r----, .
,
1 j,
.
:I
I ;
. 1
III I I
1._,.'
Ili11 Ti
;ii, .,..i, ,,, ,, : 1..,1,_..._
j-,1 11
.
-: i
. i
.1
.i ,.'!1 1
.
! 1
--1 1 ;
_.1.
. ;
Jr. 1
I
1 ,i ,,___-,-.):-fc.1,
I ' '
1
_..t I-. , ..;.
1.'_;',t :
,
H -t-Yti1 1
H i 1 , 1 ,J-1. - 1 . t
1
ij-
1..
h1.._.:_._._.
f '1 .
. ;
i
1
, 1 .
1
, 1 , 4
: I
i
;
---, -.- i---,- _i__ .......,--1-1
:-.--' ..- 1 1 :- - -.., : ,-,... ,......,--...-.--...--, - , .ITT..11,..-M
i 1
1
!
...
I!
I .
1 r ,
...,_4
'
11 7' 1 t I.
-.
Stimulus 5, 6, and 7
39
CC
Ot
g sn-rnwTs
I
i -i '
i H T-1-1--.._
1 1
1
Tn , i
1 i
'_L._
,
.
: , .
1 1_:
7., 1
! ! i
Li i
1
Li; ,,
,...4....,_,,_
.;
r1,--' i
t 1 i '
i_ 1
,__ 1 1
Illi
r 'H i 1
1'7- WIMP
1 1 I
1
I :
;
..
f-
I
ma
iiiii)
-11
....,
I-
:
i 1
.-1-
1,
1-, ,,
'
-
H
:
1
Hu
III ell
11
, :..
.
in' Mi
.
.
-
Il
HID
,
[
_:_i__Li_ 1) -'
1
iii
;
,
i , i
I:- 1
1 I
1
i ,
[-: !-
. -
,
,_,
'
.
1:
Th.'s:-
',
f
.
L -
i.:r_.
(
,. . ..1:
-- __ ..... 14. ILL, U.S.A. CHART NO. 2.
.4
110.44C1911.51e4Rftworovr.....
IN,34
APPENDIX B
Post Test
The following informational facts were presented during the
taps. Please provide the correct answer to each question.
1. Of what act were the petitioners accused by the
District of Columbia police in the spring of 1958?
2. Judge Washington dissented, believing that the pet-
itioner's Amendment rights had been abridged.
All that was heard through the microphone was what
an (a) , hidden in the hall, bedroom, or the
closet might have heard.
4. Once the spike touched the , :;.t, in effect became
a giant microphone.
Relying upon these circumstances, the Court reasoned
that the intervening wires are part of the
defendant's house or office.
6. At the very core stands the right of a man to retreat
into his own home and there be free from unreasonable
intrusion..
A distinction between the detectaphone -nployed in
Goldman and the spike mike utilized here seemed to
the Court of Appeals
8. I agree with the Ccurt that the judgement of a con-
viotion must be
3.
5.
7
41
g
Bibliography
35
1. Butter, M. Johnna. "Differential Recall of Paired Associatesas a Function of Arousal and Imagery-Concreteness Levels,"Unpublished M.A. thesis, The Pennsylvania Late University,1969. A copy of the article, accepted for publicationlater this year, has been provided this experimentor.
2. Kleinsmith, L. J., & Kaplan, S. "Paired Associate Learningas a Function of Arousal and Interpolated Interval,"Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1963,65, pp. 190-193.
3. Kleinsmith, L. J., & Kaplan, S. "Interaction of Arousaland Reca.1 Interval in Nonsense Syllable Paired AssociateLearning," Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1964,67, pp. 124-126,
4. Krech, David, & Crutchfield, Richard S., & Livson, Norman.Elements of Psychology. New York: Alfred A. Krop", 1969.
5. Levonian, Edward. "Retention of Information in Relationto arousal During Continuously Presented Material,"American Educational Research Journal, 1967, 4, pp. 103-116.
6. Lumsdaine, A. A. "Instruments and Media of Instruction,"in N. L. Gagne (editor) Handbook of Research on Teaching.
Chicago: Rand McNally & Co., 1963.
7. Maltzman, Irving. ."Individual Differences in 'Attention' :
The Orienting Reflex," in R. M. Gagne (editor) Learningand Individual. Differences. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E.Merrill Books, Inc., 1967.
8. Scott, W. A., & Wertheimer, M. Introduction to Ps cholo icalResearch. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 19 2.
9. Winer, Benjamin J. Statistical Principles in ExperimentalDesign. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1962.
42