PAIRED ASSOCIATE LEARNING

Experiment Number - 5
Date of experiment - 31/10/23
Experimenter - SR
Subject - SM
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
Pizecker 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 responses 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 the 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. The
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 get a proper hold of
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 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 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 the
study is "Paired - Associate Learning."
Problem: To study the effect of the 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 the 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 lists.
2. The difficulty level of words used is held constant in both series.
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
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 two 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:
1. "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 the Data:

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.

Number of Response Words correctly recalled

Sl. No Name
List ‘A’ List ‘B’ Difference (B-A)

1 SM 8 9 1
Table 2:

Showing the Number of Words Correctly Recalled by the Group.

Number of Response Words correctly recalled

Sl. No Name
List ‘A’ List ‘B’ Difference (B-A)

1 SM 8 9 1

2 ARM 7 9 2
3 DS 9 10 1
4 VK 7 8 1
5 NB 8 10 2
6 VN 8 10 2
7 NP 2 10 8
8 NS 7 9 2
9 BC 9 10 1
10 IS 8 9 1

Total 73 94 21

Mean 7.3 9.4 2.1

Points for Discussion:

a. Discuss whether the meaningfulness of the stimulus-response relationship has increased
recall for the Subject as well as the group.
b. Discuss the individual differences if any.

Individual Discussion:
Table - 1 shows the number of responses correctly recalled in each list by the subject SM under
list ‘A’ the subject has recalled 8 responses and in list ‘B’ the subject has recalled 9 responses
and the difference is 1.
Hence we can say that the result of the subject is according to the hypothesis, that is,
meaningfulness of a stimulus-response relationship has a positive effect on the formation of
association and on recall.

Individual Conclusion:
1. The result of the subject is according to the hypothetical expectation.
2. Stimulus-response meaningfulness has a positive effect on the formation of associations
on recall.

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 94 and the mean is 9.4
and the total difference is 21 with a mean of 2.1. On the whole, the group result is according to
the hypothetical expectation. As the scores say, performance is better under list ‘B’ than list ‘A’.
Therefore we can say that stimulus-response meaningfulness has a positive effect on the recall.
There are individual differences in recalling and there is no subject whose result is against the
hypothetical expectation.

Group Conclusion:
The group result is according to the hypothetical expectation. There are individual differences.
 REFERENCES
Arndt, J. (2012). Paired-Associate Learning. In Springer eBooks (pp. 2551–2552).
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_1038

Mourgues, C., Tan, M., Hein, S., Ojanen, E., Reich, J., Lyytinen, H., & Grigorenko, E. L.
(2016). Paired Associate Learning Tasks and their Contribution to Reading Skills.
Learning and individual differences, 46, 54–63.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.12.003