Paired Associate Learning

Krishnan. Shreya

Department of Psychology, Christ University (Kengeri Campus)

BPSY 152: Experimental Psychology

Dr Vijay M

29th October 2023

 Introduction

Paired associate learning is another method to study learning and memory parallel to

serial learning. It has been used as early as 1894 by Calkins, 1897 by Jost, 1900 by Muller

and Pilzecker and 1908 by Thorndike. Usually in paired associate learning, the order of pairs

is not important. The pairs are presented on individual cards and the packs are shuffled

between trials. The criteria measured are the number of correctly recalled response when the

stimuli are presented at random or the number of trials taken to learn all the pairs. The

method is particularly useful when we want clear cut and isolated connections within pairs of

items. In formation of associations, meaning has a major role to play. An item may be

regarded as meaningful to the extent to which it gives rise to associations. There is a very

close positive relationship between meaningfulness, and speed and ease of learning over the

entire range of meaningfulness. Larger the association value or meaningfulness of verbal

units, the faster and easier the learning.

Recent analyses of verbal learning make a distinction between response learning and

the associative stage. Response learning involves learning to identify and getting proper hold

of the complex responses so that we may be in a position to handle them effectively. If a

response is compact, internally well bound and well-integrated, it becomes more readily

available for extra associative manipulations. The other phase in verbal learning is often

called the 'Hook-up' stage and comprises of actual joining or linking of the responses with

their appropriate stimuli. Here we have associative learning proper. This analysis of response

integration or response learning, as distinguished from the stage of associative learning is

valuable. But the two phases are not separate. They may even impenetrate and overlap.

Meaningful items may be easily learned because they are already well integrated, and thus

are immediately available for relevant associative processing. Common words, being highly
over learned, are unitised and well-integrated beforehand, therefore their associative learning

commences immediately. No learning time is wasted over their response learning.

With the above theoretical background, the following experiment aims to study the effect of

Stimulus-Response meaningfulness on the formation of associations. The method used for

study is "Paired-Associate Learning."

 Paired Associate Learning

Experimenter’s name: SPC Experiment number: 4

th
Subject: SK Date: 29 October

2023

Problem

To study the effect of meaningfulness of stimulus-response relationship on the

formation of associations.

Hypothesis:

Stimulus - Response meaningfulness has a positive effect on the formation of

associations, and consequently, on recall.

Plan

1. To conduct the experiment in two series:

a) With no specific meaningful relationship between stimuli and responses.

b) With logical or meaningful connections between stimuli and responses.

2. To test recall of response words separately in both the series and compare.

3. To study the effect of meaningfulness of responses in the formation of associations

with the stimuli.

Variables

Independent Variable: Meaningfulness of stimulus-response connection.

Dependent Variable: Number of response words correctly recalled.

Controls:

1. Time of exposure is limited to 2 seconds per pair for both the lists.

2. The difficulty level of words used is held constant in both the series. Exposure is

limited to 2 seconds per pair for both the lists.

 3. The time to respond to each stimulus is limited to three seconds.

Materials:

1. Two lists of Paired-Associates, each pair written on a card. The stimulus word from

each pair is also written on the back of the corresponding card.

a) List A - Ten pairs of words with no specific meaningful relationship.

b) List B-Ten pairs of words with logical or meaningful connections between stimuli

and responses.

2. Stop Clock

(Use of the Memory Drum is suggested.)

Procedure

Series 1

Instruct the Subject to observe carefully, the exposed stimulus-response pairs Clarify

to him/her that in each pair the first word is the stimulus and the second word is the response

(an example may be given using a pair other than the ones in the two lists.) Inform the

Subject that recall will be tested for the response words paired with each stimulus. With these

instructions, present the first pair, from list 'A' for 2 seconds then the second and so on till all

the ten pairs in list A are exposed. Now expose the stimulus words printed on the back of the

cards one by one at random and obtain responses. Note down the responses given by the

Subject. Allow three seconds for the Subject to respond to each stimulus word.

Give a five-minute rest period to avoid interference before starting the second series.

Series 2

Follow the same procedure as in the first series using list B.

Instructions

"With the signal "ready" I will expose a series of cards with pairs of words, in which

the first word is the stimulus and second word is a response, observe carefully as you have to
recall the response words later". (2) "Now I will present only the stimulus words, you write

down the corresponding response words".

Analysis of Results:

1. Count the number of response words correctly recalled in each list.

2. Find out the difference in the number of words correctly recalled in each series

Difference Score in series 2-Score in series 1.

3. Calculate group Mean and Standard Deviation.

Table 1

Number of response words correctly recalled in each list by the Subject

Name List A List B Difference B-A

SK 8 9 1

Table 2

Number of response words correctly recalled in each list by the Group

No. of words correctly recalled

SI No Name List A List B Difference
1 A.G 10 10 0
2 S.K 7 9 2
3 F.A 9 10 1
4 I.S 7 8 1
5 N.S 8 10 2
6 A.A 2 10 8
7 A.M 7 9 2
8 N.P 8 10 2
9 N.B 9 10 1
10 D.S 8 9 1
Total 75 95 20
Mean 7.5 9.5 2
Individual discussion

Table 1 shows the number of responses correctly recalled in each list by the subject

A.A. under the list A, the subject has recalled 7 responses and list B, the subject has recalled

9 responses and the difference is 2.

Hence, we can say that the result of the subject is according to the hypothetical

expectation, that is meaningfulness of a S-R relationship has a positive association.

Group Discussion

Table 2 shows the number of responses correctly recalled in each list by the group.

Under the List A the total is 73 and the mean is 7.3. Under the list B the total is 96 and the

mean is 9.6 and the total difference is 23 with the mean of 2.3. Overall, the group result is

according to hypothetical expectation. As the scores says performance is better under list B

than list A. Therefore, we can say that stimulus response (S-R) meaningfulness has positive

effect on the recall. There are individual differences in recalling & there is no subject whose

result is against the hypothetical expectation.

Conclusion

1. The result of the subject is according to hypothetical expectation.

2. Stimulus response meaningfulness has a positive effect on the formation of association

on recall.

3. The Group result is according to the hypothetical expectation.

4. There are individual differences