Evidence for Alternative Strategies of Sentence Retention

Measurements of pupil size were taken while subjects listened to sentences and either tried to repeat them (R) or answered a question about them (QuA), after either a 3 or 7 sec retention interval. Pupil dilations were larger for R than for QuA, both towards the end of presentation and during the retention interval. Similar results were obtained by Kahneman and Wright (1971) when comparing total and partial recall of word lists. They attributed the differences in pupil dilations to differences in rehearsal strategy. However, the interaction between recall condition and retention interval was less convincing with sentential material, and an alternative explanation is suggested in terms of the level of abstraction at which the sentences are processed. This interpretation is supported by other evidence relating to the existence of alternative sentence retention strategies. Pupil dilations failed to reveal phrase juncture phenomena, although two levels of ambient illumination were used in the hope of detecting such effects. In a modified question condition (QuB), where the question was given before the sentence, pupil dilations varied as a function of the part of the sentence providing the answer. These data indicated that people did not begin to frame their answer until they encountered in the sentence those words used in the question.

[1]  J. Mehler.  Some effects of grammatical transformations on the recall of english sentences , 1963 .

[2]  P. Wason.  The contexts of plausible denial , 1965 .

[3]  H. Savin,et al.  Grammatical structure and the immediate recall of english sentences , 1965 .

[4]  Philip B. Gough,et al.  Grammatical transformations and speed of understanding , 1965 .

[5]  Philip B. Gough,et al.  The verification of sentences: The effects of delay of evidence and sentence length , 1966 .

[6]  S. Fillenbaum,et al.  Memory for Gist: Some Relevant Variables , 1966, Language and speech.

[7]  Joan L. Prentice.  Response strength of single words as an influence in sentence behavior , 1966 .

[8]  D. Slobin.  Grammatical transformations and sentence comprehension in childhood and adulthood , 1966 .

[9]  A Chapanis,et al.  The relevance of laboratory studies to practical situations. , 1967, Ergonomics.

[10]  Robert A. Boakes,et al.  Prompted recall of sentences , 1967 .

[11]  Arthur L. Blumenthal,et al.  Promoted recall of sentences. , 1967 .

[12]  G. Suci,et al.  The Validity of the Probe-Latency Technique for Assessing Structure in Language , 1967, Language and speech.

[13]  J. Sachs.  Recognition memory for syntactic and semantic aspects of connected discourse , 1967 .

[14]  Norman H. Mackworth,et al.  The wide-angle reflection eye camera for visual choice and pupil size , 1968 .

[15]  Allan Collins,et al.  Short-term memory for sentences , 1968 .

[16]  Recall of subject nominalizations , 1968 .

[17]  P. Ammon.  The perception of grammatical relations in sentences: A methodological exploration , 1968 .

[18]  Immediate recall of nominalizations and adjectivalizations , 1968 .

[19]  R. Rommetveit,et al.  Focus of attention in recall of active and passive sentences , 1968 .

[20]  Patricia Wright.  Sentence Retention and Transformation Theory , 1968, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[21]  Nicholas L. Rohrman,et al.  The role of syntactic structure in the recall of English nominalizations , 1968 .

[22]  H. H. Clark,et al.  Semantic Distinctions and Memory for Complex Sentences , 1968, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[23]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Effects of Grouping on the Pupillary Response in a Short-Term Memory Task , 1968, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[24]  Sentence processing assessed through intrasentence word associations. , 1969 .

[25]  Peter Herriot,et al.  The comprehension of active and passive sentences as a function of pragmatic expectations , 1969 .

[26]  P Wright,et al.  Transformations and the Understanding of Sentences , 1969, Language and speech.

[27]  A. Paivio,et al.  Concreteness and imagery in sentence meaning. , 1969 .

[28]  A. Wilkes,et al.  Analysis of storage and retrieval processes in memorizing simple sentences , 1969 .

[29]  S. Glucksberg,et al.  Grammatical structure and recall: A function of the space in immediate memory or of recall delay? , 1969 .

[30]  Robert G. Crowder,et al.  Behavioral strategies in immediate memory , 1969 .

[31]  J. Bradshaw.  Background light intensity and the pupillary response in a reaction time task , 1969 .

[32]  Thomas G. Bever,et al.  The underlying structures of sentences are the primary units of immediate speech processing , 1969 .

[33]  R. Grieve,et al.  What Is so difficult about negation? , 1969 .

[34]  P Wright,et al.  Changes of Pupil Size and Rehearsal Strategies in a Short-Term Memory Task , 1971, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.