Memory, acquisition, and category clustering in learning-disabled children.

In Experiment 1, single trial, immediate-free recall of learning disabled and nondisabled children was compared. The primacy effect in learning-disabled children was lower, suggesting that rehearsal or other types of elaborative encoding may be deficient in these children. In Experiment 2, acquisition of randomly presented categorical lists in a multitrial-free recall task was compared in learning disabled and nondisabled children. One-half of each group was required to learn the same number of words (34 per list), whereas list length for the other half exceeded the primacy effect of each child in immediate-free recall to the same degree. When the same number of items was learned, acquisition was slower in learning disabled than nondisabled children. When the number of items varied according to the primacy effect of each child, acquisition of both groups was similar. Clustering was lower in learning disabled than nondisabled children. In Experiment 3, multitrial-free recall acquisition of categorical lists was examined in a subject-paced task. When the number of words learned exceeded the primacy effect of each child to the same degree, trials to criterion were similar in both groups but, when the children learned the same number of items, learning-disabled children required more trials to criterion. Presentation rates were faster in learning-disabled children. Presentation rates were negatively correlated with trials to criterion and positively correlated with clustering and primacy in immediate-free recall, suggesting that study time may be taken up by clustering, rehearsal, and/or other encoding strategies. Deficient elaborative encoding may be responsible for the slower acquisition of learning-disabled children.     

Information processing in reading-disabled and nondisabled children

Reading disabled and nondisabled children (13-14 years of age) were presented lists of 10 words each at different rates (one word per 1, 2, and 4 sec), and immediately after the last word of each list they recalled the words in any order. Recall of the first few words presented from each list (the primacy effect) was lower in reading-disabled than nondisabled children, and slower presentation rates increased the primacy effect in both groups. These findings suggest that reading-disabled children are not completely failing to use elaborative encoding but are using less effective elaborative encoding than nondisabled readers. With all presentation rates, recall of the last few words (the recency effect) was comparable in both groups, suggesting that older reading-disabled children encode and recognize the stimuli and that elaborative encoding is deficient in reading-disabled in spite of adequate stimulus encoding and recognition.     

Allocation of study time and recall by learning disabled and nondisabled children of different ages

Study time and recall by learning-disabled and nondisabled children of five different ages were examined in a task requiring recall of digits that were presented at the child's own rate. Recall increased with age and was significantly higher by nondisabled than disabled children, particularly at older ages. As additional digits of each sequence were presented, study time by 8-year-old disabled and nondisabled groups were relatively constant, increased in older disabled and nondisabled children, but increased more in older nondisabled children than older learning disabled children. Instructions in hierarchical grouping of digits increased recall by all groups to a similar degree, but the increase by younger children and learning disabled children was associated with longer study times. The results suggest that allocation of study time and recall are developmentally delayed in learning disabled children.     

Development of the false-memory illusion

The counterintuitive developmental trend in the Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) illusion (that false-memory responses increase with age) was investigated in learning-disabled and nondisabled children from the 6- to 14-year-old age range. Fuzzy-trace theory predicts that because there are qualitative differences in how younger versus older children and disabled versus nondisabled children connect meaning information across the words on DRM lists, certain key effects that are observed in adult studies will be absent in young children and in learning-disabled children. Data on 6 such adult effects (list strength, recall inflation, delayed inflation, delayed stability, thematic intrusion, and true-false dissociation) were used to investigate this hypothesis, and the resulting data were consistent with prediction.     

Do semantic memory deficiencies underlie learning disabled readers' encoding processes?

This study investigates the extent to which learning disabled readers' atypical encoding relates to their deficiencies in semantic memory. Inferences related to ability group performance were based on the assumption that encoding involves the matching of incoming information against a featural representation of that information in semantic memory. To this end, learning disabled and nondisabled readers in two age groups were compared on dichotic listening recall tasks that included orienting and nonorienting instructions. Orienting instructions directed children's attention toward semantic, phonemic, or structural word features. Dependent measures were lateralization, free recall, retrieval organization, and selective attention. The efficiency of allocating attentional resources was inferred from correlations between central and incidental recall. Primary results included the following: Disabled and nondisabled readers' ear asymmetry differences were dependent upon age, orienting instructions, and type of word list; disabled readers' recall and organization scores were lower than skilled readers'; however, both ability groups benefitted from orienting instructions compared to nonorienting instructions; during orienting instructions, disabled readers were less able than skilled readers to divide their attention between target and nontarget word features, especially during interhemispheric processing conditions; and the relative efficiency of allocating attentional resources differed qualitatively between the two ability groups. The results suggest that ability group variations reflect the structure of the memory trace in interaction with ear presentation and encoding processes. It is inferred that disabled readers' inferior memory traces reflect the quantity and internal coherence of information stored in semantic memory as well as the means by which such information is accessed.     

Exploring the enactment effect from an information processing view: What can we learn from serial position analyses?

The focus of the present article was to analyze processes that determine the enactment and age effect in a multi-trial free recall paradigm by looking at the serial position effects. In an experimental study (see Schatz et al 2010), the performance-enhancing effect of enactive encoding and repeated learning was tested with older and younger participants. As expected, there was a steady improvement of memory performance as a function of repeated learning regardless of age. In addition, enactive encoding led to a better memory performance than verbal encoding in both age groups. Furthermore, younger adults outperformed the elderly regardless of type of encoding. Analyses in the present article show that encoding by enacting seems to profit especially from remembering the last items of a presented list. Regarding age differences, younger outperformed older participants in nearly all item positions. The performance enhancement after task repetition is due to a higher amount of recalled items in the middle positions in a subject performed task (SPT) and a verbal task (VT) as well as the last positions of a learned list in VT.     

Learning disabilities, distinctive encoding, and hemispheric resources

The purpose of this study was to isolate possible sources of learning ability differences in distinctive encoding of item-specific and relational information. Two mechanisms postulated as underlying ability group differences were attentional capacity (as inferred from the magnitude and direction of correlations between primary and secondary recall) and resource monitoring strategies (as reflected in measures of selective attention and laterality). In Experiment 1, learning disabled and nondisabled childrens' word recall was compared on dichotic listening recall tasks that included nonorienting instructions, and orienting instructions that directed children's attention toward semantic, phonemic, or structural word features. Disabled children showed lower recall and more diffuse selective attention to word features than nondisabled children. Reciprocity (negative correlations) between targeted and background words within and between ability groups was comparable, except when targeted word features were phonemically organized. Experiment 2 indicated that disabled childrens' cued recall was inferior to that of nondisabled children, even though both ability groups produced comparable symmetrical recall patterns related to ear presentations. Taken together, the results suggest that the locus of disabled childrens' distinctive encoding deficiencies is related to resource monitoring strategies during interhemispheric processing.     

A developmental study of vigilance in learning-disabled and nondisabled children

To test the proposition that learning-disabled children manifest a sustained attentional deficit, the Continuous Performance Test was administered to learningdisabled and nondisabled children at three age levels. Children were tested on three task lengths (5, 10, and 15 minutes) and two modalities (auditory and visual) in which dependent measures were correct detections and false responses, d′ and B values. As expected, learning-disabled children made fewer correct detections and more false responses and were less sensitive (d') to critical stimuli than were nondisabled children at all ages. There was also evidence to indicate that learningdisabled children apply different response criteria across age when compared to nondisabled children. B values varied significantly across age, group, modality, and time on task; d′ remained relatively unchanged across time periods. The popular notion that learning-disabled and younger subjects start a vigilance task with the same capacity as nondisabled older children but show a decline in attention as time on task increases was not supported.     

Processing of occurrence-rate and item information by children of different ages and abilities

Two experiments compare the performance of children who vary in both age and learning ability. In the first experiment, learning disabled and nondisabled children from three age groups were tested for their incidental memory for frequency of occurrence information. In the second experiment, learning disabled and nondisabled children from two age groups were tested for their intentional memory of item information on a free recall test. In agreement with the notion that frequency is automatically encoded, all groups extracted frequency information and neither age nor learning ability influenced performance. However, both age and ability influenced performance on the recall test.     

Naturalistic memory in learning-disabled and skilled readers

Three experiments compared learning-disabled and skilled readers' performance on naturalistic memory measures, as well as investigated the relationship between memory performance on everyday and laboratory tasks. In Experiment 1, the laboratory task (sentence span task) and everyday memory measures were correlated moderately for both ability groups. Compared to skilled readers, disabled readers performed poorly on the sentence span task, and were less likely than skilled readers to remember information related to common objects and consequential events. Disabled readers were also less likely to rely on external prompts to help them recall everyday information. Experiment 2 extended the previous findings to older subjects and found that the majority of significant correlations between the laboratory (word span task) and everyday memory tasks were isolated to disabled readers. When compared to chronological-age-matched subjects, disabled readers were inferior in recency performance on the laboratory (word span) and natural serial recall (e.g., recall of U.S. presidents) tasks. Experiment 3 showed that under conditions that facilitate item accessibility, ability group differences in recall were comparable. Taken together, the findings indicate that disabled readers' memory deficits are pervasive across naturalistic and laboratory measures at the younger age, but these deficits diminish for older students. Further, the deficits that occur at the older age are due to problems in accessing knowledge.     

Adult Age Differences in Divided Attention: Effects of Elaboration During Memory Encoding

The present study used attention operating characteristics (AOCs) to examine whether age differences existed in divided attention (DA) performance when both primary (cued recall) and secondary tasks (letter recall) were analyzed simultaneously. Additionally, to determine if age differences in DA might depend on the amount of elaborative processing required at study, participants either read (low elaboration) or generated (high elaboration) target words. AOC analyses indicated that performance was disrupted most when attention was divided at encoding versus retrieval, and dividing attention had a greater negative impact on older adults’ performance relative to younger adults’. Furthermore, the high elaboration condition was less affected by DA than the low elaboration condition for both age groups. The results indicate that although the ability to divide attention declines with age, some elaborative study strategies may be more resistant to DA effects for both younger and older adults.     

Prioritization within visual working memory reflects a flexible focus of attention

When motivated, people can keep nonrecent items in a list active during the presentation of new items, facilitating fast and accurate recall of the earlier items. It has been proposed that this occurs by flexibly orienting attention to a single prioritized list item, thus increasing the amount of attention-based maintenance directed toward this item at the expense of other items. This is manipulated experimentally by associating a single distinct feature with a higher reward value, such as a single red item in a list of black items. These findings may be more parsimoniously explained under a distinctiveness of encoding framework rather than a flexible attention allocation framework. The retrieval advantage for the prioritized list position may be because the incongruent feature stands out in the list perceptually and causes it to become better encoded. Across three visual working memory experiments, we contrast a flexible attention theory against a distinctiveness of encoding theory by manipulating the reward value associated with the incongruent feature. Findings from all three experiments show strong support in favor of the flexible attention theory and no support for the distinctiveness of encoding theory. We also evaluate and find no evidence that strategy use, motivation, or tiredness/fatigue associated with reward value can adequately explain flexible prioritization of attention. Flexible attentional prioritization effects may be best understood under the context of an online attentional refreshing mechanism.

     

Dissociative effects of true and false recall as a function of different encoding strategies

Goodwin, Meissner, and Ericsson (2001) proposed a path model in which elaborative encoding predicted the likelihood of verbalisation of critical, nonpresented words at encoding, which in turn predicted the likelihood of false recall. The present study tested this model of false recall experimentally with a manipulation of encoding strategy and the implementation of the process-tracing technique of protocol analysis. Findings indicated that elaborative encoding led to more verbalisations of critical items during encoding than rote rehearsal of list items, but false recall rates were reduced under elaboration conditions (Experiment 2). Interestingly, false recall was more likely to occur when items were verbalised during encoding than not verbalised (Experiment 1), and participants tended to reinstate their encoding strategies during recall, particularly after elaborative encoding (Experiment 1). Theoretical implications for the interplay of encoding and retrieval processes of false recall are discussed.     

Does strategic memory training improve the working memory performance of younger and older adults?

The paper examines the effect of strategic training on the performance of younger and older adults in an immediate list-recall and a working memory task. The experimental groups of younger and older adults received three sessions of memory training, teaching the use of mental images to improve the memorization of word lists. In contrast, the control groups were not instructed to use any particular strategy, but they were requested to carry out the memory exercises. The results showed that strategic training improved performance of both the younger and older experimental groups in the immediate list recall and in the working memory task. Of particular interest, the improvement in working memory performance of the older experimental group was comparable to that of the younger experimental group.     

Developmental recall lag in learning-disabled children: Perceptual deficit or verbal mediation deficiency?

To investigate the development of mediational deficiencies in verbal and non-verbal visual short-term memory of learning disabled children, the recall task of Atkinson, Hansen, and Bernback was administered to learning disabled children in two experimental conditions. In Experiment 1 no significant diferences on nonverbal short-term memory recall between normal and learning-disabled children were found. Similar recall responses (e.g., middle response bias, primacy effects, and recency effects) were found for both groups. Non-verbal recall was comparable for disabled and normal children as suggested by stimulus content and association scores/. Experiment 2 found that while the effects of overt rehearsal on pretrained labels on learning disabled children's recall was negligible, labels provided superior recall for normal children. Results suggested that learning disabled children suffer from a verbal mediational deficiency consistent with Flavell's (1970) mediation deficiency hypothesis.The research herein was supported by a faculty research grant at the University of Northern Colorado. Appreciation is due to the Albuquerque (New Mexico) Public School System and the Richland 1 School District, Columbia, South Carolina.     

Testing enhances subsequent learning in older but not in younger elementary school children

In adults, testing can enhance subsequent learning by reducing interference from the tested information. Here, we examined this forward effect of testing in children. Younger and older elementary school children and adult controls studied four lists of items in anticipation of a final cumulative recall test. Following presentation of each of the first three lists, participants were immediately tested on the respective list, or the list was re‐presented for additional study. Results revealed that, compared to additional study, immediate testing of Lists 1–3 enhanced memory for the subsequently studied List 4 in adults and older elementary school children, but not in younger elementary school children. The findings indicate that the forward effect of testing is a relatively late‐maturing phenomenon that develops over middle childhood and is still inefficient in the early elementary school years. Together with the results of other recent studies, these findings point to a more general problem in young children in combating interference.     

What learning-disabled readers fail to retrieve on verbal dichotic tests: A problem of encoding,retrieval, or storage?

Three theoretical models were assessed as a framework for capturing learning-disabled readers' faulty word retrieval. To this end, learning-disabled and skilled readers were compared on verbal dichotic listening tasks for free recall and cued recall of word lists organized by semantic, phonemic, and structural features. The results indicated that disabled readers were comparable on free recall but were inferior to skilled readers on cued recall. No ability group differences were found for categorical and noncategorical recall intrusions during the cued recall phase. Cued recall performance was further analyzed for individual differences in memory trace structure (via the Tulving & Watkins, 1975, reduction method), ear asymmetry, and the allocation of attention to word features prior to cuing. Results indicated that during the cued recall phase, disabled readers' memory traces were inferior in structure to those of skilled readers, even though the two ability groups produced comparable symmetrical recall patterns for the ear presentations. Further, disabled readers had lower selective attention scores for the interhemispheric processing of information prior to cuing than did skilled readers. Taken together, the results suggest that, prior to cued recall, disabled readers suffer from attentional difficulties during interhemispheric processing, which in turn influences the structural formation of their memory trace.This research was supported by a grant from the U.S. Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. Special appreciation is given to Greelley District IV schools for providing subjects, to Missy Reda and Stephanie Contros for the data collection, and to two anonymous reviewers for their critical comments on a draft of this article.     

Greater priming for previously distracting information in young than older adults when suppression is ruled out

The use of previously distracting information on memory tests with indirect instructions is usually age-equivalent, while young adults typically show greater explicit memory for such information. This could reflect qualitatively distinct initial processing (encoding) of distracting information by younger and older adults, but could also be caused by greater suppression of such information by younger adults on tasks with indirect instructions. In Experiment 1, young and older adults read stories containing distracting words, which they ignored, before studying a list of words containing previously distracting items for a free recall task. Half the participants were informed of the presence of previously distracting items in the study list prior to recall (direct instruction), and half were not (indirect instruction). Recall of previously distracting words was age-equivalent in the indirect condition, but young adults recalled more distracting words in the direct condition. In Experiment 2, participants performed the continuous identification with recognition task, which captures a measure of perceptual priming and recognition on each trial, and is immune to suppression. Priming and recognition of previously distracting words was greater in younger than older adults, suggesting that the young engage in more successful suppression of previously distracting information on tasks in which its relevance is not overtly signaled.     

Executive processing differences between learning-disabled,mildly retarded,and normal achieving children

This study examined possible executive processing differences between mildly retarded, learning-disabled, and normal achieving children. To this end, the groups were compared as to their ability to recall central and secondary words from base and elaborative sentences under conditions of high and low encoding effort. Executive processing was inferred from the children's ability to maintain optimal recall performance for central and secondary words. Groups were comparable in central recall, but differences in secondary recall occurred for the high- effort encoding condition. Qualitative differences related to the prioritizing of resources (as reflected in the correlation between central and secondary recall) and monitoring the transfer of information (as reflected from central and secondary recall insertions) were found between groups. The results were discussed in terms of an executive processing frame-work that views retarded children as suffering from inefficiencies related to the sharing of resources, whereas the learning-disabled children's inefficiencies were related to the discrimination of resources.The author is indebted to Karl Schemdli, Director of Special Education and Susan Swaim, Research Director, University of Northern Colorado Laboratory School, for their administration assistance in providing children for this study. The author is indebted to Dr. Jim Nicholes for his assistance in the data collection.     

Within-session spacing improves delayed recall in children

Multiple retrievals of a memory over a spaced manner improve long-term memory performance in infants, children, younger and older adults; however, few studies have examined spacing effects with young school-age children. To expand the understanding of the spacing benefit in children, the current study presented weakly associated English word-pairs to children aged 7–11 and cued their recall two times immediately (massed), after a delay of 5 or 10 items (spaced) or not at all (control). After this encoding session with or without two retrievals, participants were tested two times for memory of all word-pairs: immediately and 30 minutes after the encoding session. Multiple retrievals significantly improved memory on the tests. However, words repeated in a spaced design were remembered at higher rates than those that were massed, while gap size between repetitions (5 or 10) did not differentially impact performance. The data show that a within-session spacing strategy can benefit children's ability to remember word-pairs after 30 minutes. Thus, asking students to recall what they have learned within a lesson is a technique that can be used in a classroom to improve long-term recall.