NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Showing all 9 results Save | Export
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
McGraw, Kenneth O.; McCullers, John C. – Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1974
To determine whether the distraction effect associated with material rewards in discrimination learning can account for the superior performance of reward groups in probability learning, the performance of 144 school children (preschool, second, and fifth grades) on a two-choice successive discrimination task was compared under three reinforcement…
Descriptors: Age Differences, Discrimination Learning, Elementary School Students, Motivation
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Levin, Joel R.; And Others – Journal of Educational Psychology, 1973
Results lend partial support to the proposition that the effectiveness of a particular rehearsal strategy depends on the degree to which it provides a discriminative cue for the materials on hand: With homonym pairs, imagery constituted such a discriminative cue, while vocalization did not; with synonym pairs, the converse was true. (Authors/CB)
Descriptors: Articulation (Speech), Cues, Discrimination Learning, Elementary School Students
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Goldstein, Sondra Blevins; Siegel, Alexander W. – Child Development, 1972
Study attempts to clarify the attentional versus perceptual learning functions of presence of the discriminative stimuli during delay. (Authors)
Descriptors: Data Analysis, Discrimination Learning, Elementary School Students, Pacing
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Cunningham, Thomas F.; Thaller, Karl E. – Child Study Journal, 1975
A total of 128 first- and second-graders participated in two sets of shift problems: (1) four extra-dimensional shifts; and (2) shift problems with two types of cue-reinforcement conditions (same and reversal). (ED)
Descriptors: Contingency Management, Cues, Dimensional Preference, Discrimination Learning
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Spear, Paul S.; Spear, Sara Allen – Developmental Psychology, 1972
Main effect of reinforcement for mean response latency indicated that subjects took longer to respond under disapproval than under approval or silence. (Authors)
Descriptors: Age Differences, Data Analysis, Discrimination Learning, Elementary School Students
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Nettelbeck, T.; Lally, M. – American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1979
Ten young males (aged 16-to-22 years) whose IQ scores ranged from 51 to 77 were compared on a simple discrimination task with ten male university students (aged 18-to-23 years) and 28 nonretarded male children (aged 7-to-11 years) in order to determine if reaction time is a consequence of mental retardation.
Descriptors: College Students, Discrimination Learning, Elementary School Students, Intelligence
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Cronin, Virginia – Journal of the Association for the Study of Perception, 1982
Reports the results of two experiments dealing with children's visual and tactual performance. In the first task, after several presentations of a series, the tactual group made almost errorless discriminations. But with memory demands, tactual performance became poorer than visual performance. Found a large developmental difference. (JAC)
Descriptors: Age Differences, Child Development, Cognitive Processes, Discrimination Learning
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Stipek, Deborah J.; Kowalski, Patricia S. – Journal of Educational Psychology, 1989
A study involving 110 fifth- and sixth-graders (51 male and 59 female), classified as low or high in effort orientation, assessed the effects of task- versus performance-oriented instructions on a computer-assisted test programed to ensure that all examinees failed to solve all problems. Problem-solving strategy analyses were preformed. (TJH)
Descriptors: Attribution Theory, Comparative Analysis, Computer Assisted Testing, Discrimination Learning
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Waber, Deborah P.; Weiler, Michael D.; Wolff, Peter H.; Bellinger, David; Marcus, David J.; Ariel, Raya; Forebes, Peter; Wypig, David – Child Development, 2001
Compared the processing of rapid auditory stimuli on two-tone auditory discrimination tasks by 7- to 11-year-olds with learning impairments (LI) and those without learning impairments (non-LI). Found that LI children committed more errors, but the effects of timing were comparable. Obtained same results with a sample of good and poor readers. Task…
Descriptors: Auditory Stimuli, Children, Cognitive Processes, Comparative Analysis