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