Relations involved in vocabulary Type of Relation Example Discriminative Paired Associates [S.
The middle column, discriminative relations, includes relations involving specific stimuli and responses, as found in paired associate learning at a basic level and verbal repertoires at the highest level.
These occasion-behavior pairs are involved in paired associate and multiple discrimination learning.
The acquisition and retention of paired associates by good, average, and poor readers.
In a study of paired associate memory by Otto (1961) found that training results for memorization of nonsense names to five geometric shapes varied as a function of grade level and reading skill.
The team administered nine neuropsychologic tests to the workers, including the Mini-Mental Status Examination (which measures different cognitive components), the Wechsler Paired Associates
Test of memory, the Benton Visual Retention Test, the Isaacs Set Test (which measures the ability to quickly generate lists of words in different semantic categories), and the Finger Tapping Test (which assesses motor speed).
The effects of instruction in a paired associates
strategy on the information mastery performance of students with learning disabilities.
At this stage participants were trained, using a paired associates
learning procedure, to associate stimuli with semantically opposite words.
Specifically, the Paired Associates
Learning (PAL) test in CANTAB showed a statistically significant improvement on Phenserine in both the per protocol analysis (two-tailed t test; p= 0.
The paired associates taught to Group 1 in the first PA episode and to Group 2 in the second consisted of misassociations - new pairings between the names of A samples and B comparisons which were discordant with the trained relations established by MTS training (see Table 1).
In each PA training episode the list of six paired associates was read aloud twice to each subject by the experimenter with a gap of approximately 2 seconds between each pair.
The paired associates
taught to the A-B group consisted of incompatible associations between the names of A samples and B comparisons, that is, the name of an A stimulus from one potential MTS-trained equivalence class, for example, |A.