- Email: [email protected]
Intonation grouping and related words in free recall
JOURNAL
OF VERBAL
LEARNING
Intonation
AND
VERBAL
Grouping
BEHAVIOR
15,
85-92
and Related MURRAY
(1976)
Words
in Free
Recall
GLANZER
New York University Two studies were carried out demonstrating the interaction of intonation grouping and meaning relations between words in free recall. When the intonation grouping is in phase with the word relations, recall is facilitated. When it is out of phase, recall is lowered. This is an effect on long-term store. A separate effect of intonation grouping on short-term store is also replicated. The relation of these effects to the processing of language is considered.
The immediate and particular purpose of the work described below is to study the interaction of grouping with word relations in a memory task. The more distant and general purpose that motivates the work is to put some light on the relation between memory processing and language processing. The type of grouping studied here is “intonation grouping,” a pattern of pitch, stress, and juncture imposed on a sequence of words. This form of grouping is also referred to as “temporal grouping” (Ryan, 1969a, 1969b) and “rhythm” (Neisser, 1967). Intonation grouping is a prominent, universal characteristic of speech (Lieberman, 1967). Subjects will form intonation groups whether they wish to or not in the speaking of a series of words. They will hear intonation groups in a monotone series of words. The importance of intonation grouping as a general organizing principle has been argued in detail by Neisser (1967, pp. 232-235). The word relations studied here are paradigmatic or set relations. The related words are either coordinate pairs, such as doctor-lawyer’, or subordinate-superordinate pairs, such as anger-emotion. They may also
be viewed simply, and superficially, as associative relations. The following three assertions may be made about the effect of intonation grouping and word relations on free recall. Two of them are clearly supported by data. 1. Intonation grouping in a list of unrelated words, that is, a list without word relations built in, produces a slight increase in free reacll. This increase is an effect solely on short-term store1 or primary memory. Gianutsos (1972), in several experiments, presented lists of words grouped in threes. She demonstrated an increase in the amount recalled. The increase is, however, limited to the last few words in the list, the part of the list identified with output from short-term store. Recall of the earlier part of the list, the part identified with output from long-term store, is not facilitated at all. The absence of any effect of grouping on long-term store is borne out in the work of Laughery and Spector (1972) on ordered recall learning. The increase in recall of the last few words in the list, the output from short-term store, is associated with a marked change in the serial position curve. Instead of the usual,
This work was carried out under grant GB-3208 from the National Science Foundation. The author thanks Lewis Levine of the Department of Linguistics, New York University, who listened to the tapes and characterized the intonation patterns. Requests for reprints should be sent to Murray Glanzer, Department of Psychology, 4 Washington Place, New York University, New York, New York 10003.
1 The distinction between long-term store and short-term store as found in the work of Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968) and Glanzer (1972) will be used in this paper. Readers who prefer a distinction in terms of “early processing” v. “late processing” or “levels of processing” (Craik & Lockhart, 1972) are encouraged to substitute those terms. The equivalence of these distinctions is one of the main points of the paper.
Copyright 0 1976 by Academic Press, Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved. Printed in Great Britain
85
86
MURRAY GLANZER
continuous end peak, a step function appears. Words in the last group are recalled equally well, forming a step or plateau at a very high level. Words in the next to the last group often form a second step at a lower level. The same step function is seen in the Bower and Winzenz (1969) data for immediate ordered recall of grouped number sequences (their Figure 7, P. 7). 2. Related words in a list that is presented in a monotone, that is, without intonation grouping, also produce an increase in free recall. This increase is, by contrast, an effect solely on long-term store or secondary memory. When associates or semantically related words appear in a list there is an increase in the amount recalled. The increase is, however, an increase in the recall of early list items, the words retrieved from long-term store. Estimation of the effect of word relations on the amount held in short-term store finds no effect. (Craik & Levy, 1970; Glanzer & Schwartz, 1971; Glanzer, 1972). 3. Related words and intonation grouping interact. The interaction depends on the way in which the two factors are coordinated. There is only one set of data relevant to this assertion. Bower and Springston (1970) found that the immediate recall of letter strings increased when temporal grouping coincided with meaningful letter sequences, for example, FBI. That finding can be viewed as indirect support for the assertion. There are other data that indicate that intonation grouping interacts with other linguistic factors such as the phonemic legality of sequences of letters (Bower & Springston, 1970) or indicators of grammatical structure (O’Connell, Turner, & Onuska, 1968). Those data, however, are more remotely related to the assertion. One of the main aims of the present study is to obtain directly relevant data. The three assertions above are congruent with a general, linguistic processing hypothesis concerning memory (Glanzer, 1972, pp. 186-189; Glanzer & Razel, 1974, pp. 129-130)2. The hypothesis asserts that the
stages evidenced in memory tasks reflect stages in linguistic processing. Short-term store reflects the early processing, long-term store later processing. The three assertions outlined above fit into this view in the following way. Grouping sets up a tentative unit in shortterm store for further analysis. This tentative unit is recoverable from short-term store as a unit, as evidenced by the increase in recall of grouped items from the end of the list. It is also evidenced by the special, forward recall order found in the recall of those grouped items from the end of the list (Gianutsos, 1972).3 If the tentative unit set up by the grouping corresponds to a conceptual or linguistic structure in long-term store, then the grouped short-term store unit is converted to a long-term store unit, with the advantage of a pre-set structure. If, however, the correspondence does not exist, then no such unit can be formed immediately in long-term store.4 Moreover, as new items enter short-term store, the tentative short-term store unit is lost. The two experiments reported below explore the interaction of intonation grouping with word relations. The first experiment establishes the effect of coordination of intonation grouping with meaning relations between words. It also shows that the effect is on longterm store. The second experiment analyzes this interaction effect further and shows that the effect is restricted to long-term store. EXPERIMENT I
The purpose of this experiment was to determine whether intonation grouping interacts with word relations in the recall of words. ‘A very similar argument has been presented by Neisser, Hoenig and Goldstein (1969) on the basis of the effects of grouping on memory. 3 Under monotone presentation, words from the end of the list are recalled in a mixed order. Under grouped presentation they are recalled in the order of presentation. ’ The subject then has to construct a larger unit on the basis of the individual words presented or work with the individual words.
GROUPING
AND
RELATED
The focus here was on effects in long-term store. Method
Subjects listened to lists of nouns with marked intonation grouping and then recalled the words. Included in the lists were pairs of related words. Half of these related word pairs were coordinated or in phase with the intonation grouping. Half were out of phase with the intonation grouping. A sample arrangement is shown below. A series of 18 lists, each 24 words in length, was presented to the subjects by means of a tape recorder. The words were recorded at 1.5 set rate with an intonation pattern that grouped them into triplets. The intonation pattern of each triplet could be characterized, generally, as follows : high, using pitch on the first word; medium, rising pitch on the second word; and low, falling pitch on the third word. Within each list were four pairs of related words, the pair members separated by one intervening word. Two pairs were placed so that both members fell within a single group. These will be called in-phase pairs. Two pairs were placed so that the members fell in two different, neighboring groups. These will be called out-of-phase pairs. A section of a sample list is the following: kite, guest, enemy/ page, drink, gravel1 square, frost, triangle/ shark, chair, fish/ stool, cotton, state/ cloth, dough . . . The slashes indicate groupings. The words square-triangle and shark--sh are in-phase pairs; chair-stool and cotton-cloth are out-of-phase pairs. Across
the 18 lists nine in-phase pairs appeared at Positions 7 and 9, 10 and 12, 13 and 15, 16 and 18, for a total of thirty-six in-phase pairs. Similarly, nine out-of-phase pairs appeared at Positions 5 and 7, 8 and 10, 11 and 13,14and 16. Materials. Seventy-two pairs of related nouns were used in the lists. Each related pair consisted of a stimulus word and one of its associates, drawn from a variety of word
WORDS
IN FREE RECALL
87
association norms. The word-pairs were all paradigmatic associates consisting of either a subordinate-superordinate pair, like clarinet and instrument, or a coordinate pair like hawk and eagle. The mean word frequency count (KuEera-Francis, 1967) was 59; the mean word syllable length was 1.6. The filler words consisted of 288 nouns, matched with the related words with respect to mean word frequency count and number of syllables per word. Two sets of lists were recorded using the same word pairs and filler words. The two sets of lists differed in the following ways: (a) The filler items were independently randomized in the two sets of lists, and (b) the word pairs were reversed in their assignments. Word pairs that were placed in phase in Set 1 were placed out of phase in Set 2 and vice versa. Half of the subjects were tested on Set 1, the other half on Set 2. Subjects. The subjects were 30 college students who participated to fulfill a course requirement. They were assigned at random to the two sets of lists. Procedure. The subjects were first given free recall instructions and two practice lists of the same length and form as the main lists. Following this they were given the 18 main lists. Each subject was tested individually. After each list the subject was given one minute to write the words he could recall. Results
The results for the two sets of lists were first compared. Since they did not differ in any marked way, the results were pooled for the analyses below. The overall results are shown in Fig. 1. The unrelated filler items yield a serial position curve that is normal except for the end peak. Instead of the smoothly rising end peak usually found in free recall, the curve in Fig. 1 displays the step function in the end peak that characterizes free recall with grouped presentation (Gianutsos, 1972). The last group, Positions 22, 23, and 24, form one step. The
88
MURRAY
1.00 .90
-
RELATED
IN
-
RELATED OUT UNRELATED
fs .50F :: ia ‘40 .305 z- .eo.10
t I
1
I
I
3
I
I
I
6
I
I
I,
9
SERIAL
I
I
I2
I
I
I
15
I,
!
1.3
I,
I
21
I,,
E4
POSITION
FIG. 1. Probability of recall as a function of serial position for related words in phase with the intonation grouping (RELATED IN), related words out of phase (RELATED OUT), and unrelated words. Note that some serial positions did not have certain classes of word types. For example, there were no unrelated words at Positions 7, lo,13 and 36.
next to last group, Positions 19, 20, and 21, form the other step. The curves for the related words lie well above the baseline for unrelated words in Fig. 1. Moreover, the curve for related words that are in phase, that is, both related words falling within a single intonation grouping, is higher than for related words that are out of phase. The mean proportion of unrelated words recalled in positions 4 to 18 is .14, for related out of phase is .25 and for related in phase is .31. The simplest analysis is that of the overall means for the in-phase versus the out-of-phase positions. Analysis of variance of these means finds the effect of the coordination significant, F(1, 29) = 12.07, p < .005.
The analysis above is based on data from all eight in-phase and all eight out-of-phase
GLANZER
positions although the two conditions have only four positions in common, as can be seen in Fig. 1. A parallel statistical analysis that considers only the positions that were common to the two conditions-7,10,13, and 16-gives essentially the same results, $‘(I, 29) = 18.34, p < .0005. The difference between related and unrelated words does not require extensive analysis. Comparison of the mean number of words recalled for positions 4-18 for the unrelated filler words and related words for each subject shows the following. Every subject recalled fewer unrelated filler words than in-phase related words. The probability of this occurring by chance, is using the binomial, (.5)30 or less than 10b9. Twentyeight of 30 subjects recalled fewer filler words than out-of-phase related words. The probability of this occurring by chance is 466(.5)30 or less than 10F6. Discussion
The results support the idea that the grouping interacts with the relations of the words. Moreover, the effect of this interaction is on long-term store since the section of the serial position curve that precedes the end peak is clearly affected. Whether there is also an effect on short-term store remains to be determined. The next experiment is, in part, concerned with that question.
EXPERIMENT
II
Experiment I demonstrated that word relations and intonation grouping interact. The purpose of the present experiment was twofold. One was to examine the nature of the interaction further by comparing the effect of grouping with monotone presentation. The other was to examine the specificity of the effect with respect to long-term and shortterm store. Groups of four words were used here instead of the groups of three used in Experiment I.
GROUPING
AND
RELATED
Method The method was basically the same as that in Experiment I, except for the addition of an ungrouped, monotone presentation condition. The subjects were equally divided into two groups. Both groups heard and recalled a series of free recall lists, each consisting of 24 nouns presented at a 1.5 set rate. One group heard the lists grouped, segmented into six intonation groups of four words each. The intonation pattern for the four words in a group was, generally, as follows: first word, high rising; second word, mid-level; third word, mid-level; fourth word, mid-level to low falling. The other group heard the same lists of words recorded in a monotone. Each list contained four related pairs of words. The serial position of the related pairs was systematically varied across lists. The subjects first heard and recalled two practice lists. Then they were given 20 main lists. Materials. Eighty pairs of related nouns were used, the 72 used in Experiment I plus eight new associated pairs. The filler words were those used in Experiment I with seven substitutions and 22 additional words. Members of a related word pair were either coordinate pairs, such as, barley and oats, or subordinate-superordinate pairs, such as copper and metal. The matching of the unrelated filler words and the associated words with respect to word frequency and number of syllables per word was maintained. Four related word pairs were placed in each word list with one filler word intervening between the pair members. Two pairs were in phase with the grouping and two were out of phase. Across the 20 lists the related words were placed in every position except Positions 1 and 24. This gave the same number of related words, four in phase and four out of phase, at every position between 4 and 21. Within each list the related words were placed so that one of the four began at each of the four possible positions in the word groups. This means that the first word of one pair would be the first word in one group, the first word of another
WORDS
IN FREE RECALL
89
pair would be the second word in another group, and so on. A sample list is the following: dot, mist, cofee, blood/ tea, butter$y, school, bee/ rod, parachute, age, earth/ label, planet, gear, saddle/ joy, gypsy, sorrow, bag/ jury, harbor, army, picture. The in-phase pairs in this list are butterfly-bee, joy-sorrow. The out-of-phase pairs are cofee-tea, earthplanet. Three different randomized sets of lists were constructed within the constraints indicated above. Related words were randomly assigned to in-phase and out-of-phase positions for each of the three list series. Another, matched set of three list series was constructed by reversing the assignments of the related word pairs to in-phase and out-of-phase conditions, that is, each in-phase pair became an out-of-phase pair, and vice versa. Each series of lists was recorded both with intonation grouping and without intonation grouping, in a monotone. The terms in-phase and out-of-phase, of course, have no real meaning for the monotone lists. Subjects. The subjects were 60 college students. Thirty were paid volunteers, 30 were students fulfilling course requirements. Five paid subjects were randomly assigned to each of the six grouped list series and to each of the six ungrouped series. The same was done with the unpaid subjects. Results The overall results are shown in Fig. 2. The main findings are the following. 1. There were more grouped in-phase words recalled than grouped out-of-phase words. This replicates the main finding of Experiment I. 2. The number of ungrouped related words recalled falls between the number of in-phase related words and out-of-phase related words recalled. 3. The grouped lists show the characteristic step function in the end peak, the ungrouped lists do not. This finding replicates preceding findings.
90
MURRAY 1.00
r
.90 -
.80-
-
RELATED RELATED
IN OUT
*----a -
RELATED MONO UNRELATED GRPD
*----a
UNRELATED
MONO
I I I I I I I I / I I I, I I I I I I I I I t I, 1 4 8 12 16 20 24
SERIAL
POSITION
FIG. 2. Probability of recall as a function of serial position for related words in phase with the intonation grouping (RELATED IN), related words out of phase (RELATED OUT), and ungrouped or monotone related words (RELATED MONO). Also shown are the serial position curves for unrelated words under both grouped and monotone presentation.
4. There is no interaction effect of grouping and word relations in the end peak. The interaction effect is an effect on long-term store only. The first step in analyzing the data was to carry out an overall analysis of variance for Positions 4 through 21, the positions at which all the experimental conditions were represented. The specific comparisons that are of interest were then made. The overall mean proportion of words recalled was .28 for both the grouped and ungrouped lists. This is in agreement with earlier findings (Gianutsos, 1972) that the positive effects of grouping do not appear in the early list positions. Within the grouped condition, the mean proportion of in-phase related words recalled was .40, out-of-phase .33. The difference between these two conditions is statistically
GLANZER
significant, 41, 58) = 12.80, p < .OOl. Within the ungrouped condition the corresponding sets of related words have the same mean proportion, .37 and .37. This proportion for the ungrouped related words lies midway between the proportions for the grouped in-phase and grouped out-of-phase words. Comparison of the grouped in-phase words with the combined ungrouped related words gives F(1, 58) = 3.30, p < .lO. The parallel comparison of the grouped out-of-phase words with the ungrouped related words gives F(1, 58) = 5.36,~ < .025. The effect of grouping in producing a step function ‘in the end peak can be seen by comparing the serial position curves for the unrelated words in the grouped and ungrouped conditions. The step is quite clear in the last group covering Positions 21-24. In the grouped condition the proportions are all high and form an array with near zero slope-.86, .77, .82, .94. In the monotone condition the same four positions are lower on the average and form the usual monotonic, rising array-.46, .64, .84, .94. The difference in the next to last group, Positions 17-20, is less clear, appearing only in the slopes of the two corresponding arrays. To examine the role of the interaction between grouping and word relations in short-term store, the proportions of recalled words were compared for Positions 17-21. These are the final positions that have both in-phase and out-of-phase related words. They are also positions that show the end-peak rise. The mean proportion of in-phase words recalled in these positions is .5 1, out-of-phase .48. The difference between the two conditions is no longer significant here, F(1, 29) < 1. A more elaborate analysis that corrects the proportions above to estimate the amount held in short-term store alone (see Glanzer, 1972, p. 138) supports the statement that there is no effect of the coordination of grouping and word relations on short-term store. The interaction is a long-term store effect. The significant difference found in the overall
GROUPING
AND
RELATED
analysis reported earlier between the in-phase and out-of-phase pairs is determined by the differences in Positions 4-16, the positions reflecting output from long-term store.
WORD
IN FREE RECALL
91
is the effective one, in tasks such as the ones used here, remains to be demonstrated.5 Ryan’s (1969a, 1969b) findings do not support the selection of spacing as the sole effective factor. Discussion The usual generalization about grouping The results above indicate that the intonadrawn from past findings is that grouping tion grouping acts as a selective filter, emphasi- improves recall. The present study replaces zing the relation between words that fall in that broad generalization with two morethe same intonation group, suppressing the specific statements. relation between words that fall in different 1. Grouping per se improves recall from intonation groups. This would be a natural short-term store. 2. Grouping that is in phase with meaning result of the kind of linguistic processing outlined earlier in which the intonation group relations or, more generally, linguistic relasets up a tentative unit for processing. tions, between list items also improves recall The fact that the ungrouped related pairs from long-term store. fall between the in-phase grouped and the Most of the work reported in the literature out-of-phase grouped pairs also fits what is has been concerned with immediate recall of known about the subject’s handling of lists of relatively short lists of items (Ryan, 1969a, words. The subject sets up his own intonation 1969b; Wickelgren, 1964). Those tasks stronggroupings when they are not presented in the ly reflect output from short-term store. The material. This can be heard when the subject results of the studies support Statement 1 reads off or repeats a list of words. Such a above. When longer lists of unrelated words subject-determined grouping would be ex- are used, as in the present study and the pected, whatever its form, to be in phase with studies by Gianutsos (1972), grouping imsome of the related pairs and out of phase proves recall only for the last few list items, the with other pairs. The average of those two items retrieved from short-term store. conditions would give mean proportions like There have been reports of some effects of those observed in the related monotone curve grouping on long-term store. Bower and of Fig. 2. Winzenz (1969) found, for example, that when The same point explains why grouping has number series were repeated with the same so little effect on the recall of lists of “unregrouping in a Hebb task, the subjects learned lated” words. Those lists usually have some the number series. They did not learn them related words near each other. Their effect when the grouping was changed from prewill, however, be split. The recall of those sentation to presentation. This effect occurs, that happen to be in phase with the subject’s however, only with numbers. When random fortuitous groupings is facilitated. The recall letter sequences are given in the same way, of those that happen to be out of phase is subjects do not learn the sequences any faster lowered. On the average, very little positive or with repeated grouping (Laughery & Spector, negative effect will be observable. 1972). The reason for this is, as Laughery and The term intonation grouping has been used 5 Spacing between words differs slightly in the grouphere to refer to a complex of linguistic marking ed and monotone conditions. Measures of the intervals between words in Experiment II showed the following. devices that occur together in natural speechIn the grouped condition the interval after each word pitch, stress, and juncture. Most psychological from the first to the last word in the group, work has tended to focus on the aspect of increased going from a mean of .8 to 1.0 sec. The corresponding juncture, or spacing between items (see also means for the monotone condition stayed constant at Aaronson, 1967). Whether indeed that factor .9 sec.
MURRAY GLANZER
92
Spector point out, that grouped numbers are generally “recodable,” that is, can be related to each other in a way that arbitrary sequences of a letter cannot be. Another way to state this is to say that any sequence of numbers, except perhaps one that starts with zero, forms a grammatically acceptable unit that can be selected by intonation grouping. No rules are violated by a randomly drawn sequence such as 24 or 775. The same statement does not hold for any sequence of letters or any sequence of words. Rules are violated by a randomly drawn sequence of letters such as mcq, or a randomly drawn sequence of words. The data fit the following picture. Intonation grouping sets up initial processing units. Those units that match long-term structural units are selected and registered. The units in this study were semantic units. The same selection and registration has been observed when the units correspond to phonemically legal sequences (Bower & Springston, 1970) or to syntactic regularities (O’Connell, Turner & Onuska, 1968). The effects observed here, therefore, reflect the workings of a general linguistic processing mechanism, a mechanism that selects units at the phonemic sequence, syntactic and semantic levels. REFERENCES AARONSON, D. Temporal factors in perception and short-term memory. Psychological Bulletin, 1967, 67, 13&144. ATKINSON, R. C., & SEIFFRIN, R. M. Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In K. W. Spence & J. T. Spence (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation: search and theory, Vol. II. New
Advances
York:
in re-
Academic
Press, 1968. Pp. 89-195. G. H., & SPRINGSTON, F. Pauses as recoding points in letter series. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970,83,421-430. BOWER, G. H., & WINZENZ, D. Group structure coding and memory for digit series. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969, 80, (2, Part 2) 1-17. BOWER,
CRAIK, F. I. M., & LEVY, B. A. Semantic and acoustic information in primary memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970,86, 77-82. CRAIK, F. I. M., & LOCKHART, R. S. Levels of processing : A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1972, l&671-684. GUNUTSOS, R. Free recall of grouped words. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1972,95,419-428. GLANZER, M. Storage mechanisms in recall. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivations
Advances
in
research
and
theory,
Vol. V. New York: Academic Press, 1972. Pp. 1299193. GLANZER, M., & RAVEL, M. The size of the unit in short-term storage. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1974,13, 114-131. GLANZER, M., & SCHWARTZ, A. Mnemonic structure in free recall: Differential effects on STS and LTS. Journal
of Verbal
Learning
1971,10,194-198. K&ERA, H., & FRANCIS,
and
Verbal
Behavior,
W. N. Computational
English. Providence, R. I. : Brown University Press, 1967. LAUGHERY, K. R., &SPECTOR, A. The roles of recoding and rhythm in memory organization. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1972,94,4148. analysis
of present-day
LIEBERMAN,
P. Intonation,
Cambridge:
American
perception,
and
language.
M.I.T. Press, 1967.
Psychology. New York: Crofts, 1967. NELSSER, U., HOENIG, Y. J., &GOLDSTEIN, E. Perceptual organization in the prefix effect. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1969, 8, 424429. O’CONNELL, D. C., TURNER, E. .4., & ONUSKA, L. A. Intonation, grammatical structure and contextual association in immediate recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1968,7,110-l 16. RYAN, J. Grouping and short-term memory: Different means and patterns of grouping. Quarterly Journal of ExperimentalPsychology, 1969,21,137-147. (a) RYAN, J. Temporal grouping, rehearsal and shortterm memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969,21,148-155. (b) WICKELGREN, W. A. Size of rehearsal group and shortterm memory. Journal of ExperimentalPsychology, 1964,68,413-419. NEISSER,
U.
Cognitive
Appleton-Century
(Received August 22,1975)
OF VERBAL
LEARNING
Intonation
AND
VERBAL
Grouping
BEHAVIOR
15,
85-92
and Related MURRAY
(1976)
Words
in Free
Recall
GLANZER
New York University Two studies were carried out demonstrating the interaction of intonation grouping and meaning relations between words in free recall. When the intonation grouping is in phase with the word relations, recall is facilitated. When it is out of phase, recall is lowered. This is an effect on long-term store. A separate effect of intonation grouping on short-term store is also replicated. The relation of these effects to the processing of language is considered.
The immediate and particular purpose of the work described below is to study the interaction of grouping with word relations in a memory task. The more distant and general purpose that motivates the work is to put some light on the relation between memory processing and language processing. The type of grouping studied here is “intonation grouping,” a pattern of pitch, stress, and juncture imposed on a sequence of words. This form of grouping is also referred to as “temporal grouping” (Ryan, 1969a, 1969b) and “rhythm” (Neisser, 1967). Intonation grouping is a prominent, universal characteristic of speech (Lieberman, 1967). Subjects will form intonation groups whether they wish to or not in the speaking of a series of words. They will hear intonation groups in a monotone series of words. The importance of intonation grouping as a general organizing principle has been argued in detail by Neisser (1967, pp. 232-235). The word relations studied here are paradigmatic or set relations. The related words are either coordinate pairs, such as doctor-lawyer’, or subordinate-superordinate pairs, such as anger-emotion. They may also
be viewed simply, and superficially, as associative relations. The following three assertions may be made about the effect of intonation grouping and word relations on free recall. Two of them are clearly supported by data. 1. Intonation grouping in a list of unrelated words, that is, a list without word relations built in, produces a slight increase in free reacll. This increase is an effect solely on short-term store1 or primary memory. Gianutsos (1972), in several experiments, presented lists of words grouped in threes. She demonstrated an increase in the amount recalled. The increase is, however, limited to the last few words in the list, the part of the list identified with output from short-term store. Recall of the earlier part of the list, the part identified with output from long-term store, is not facilitated at all. The absence of any effect of grouping on long-term store is borne out in the work of Laughery and Spector (1972) on ordered recall learning. The increase in recall of the last few words in the list, the output from short-term store, is associated with a marked change in the serial position curve. Instead of the usual,
This work was carried out under grant GB-3208 from the National Science Foundation. The author thanks Lewis Levine of the Department of Linguistics, New York University, who listened to the tapes and characterized the intonation patterns. Requests for reprints should be sent to Murray Glanzer, Department of Psychology, 4 Washington Place, New York University, New York, New York 10003.
1 The distinction between long-term store and short-term store as found in the work of Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968) and Glanzer (1972) will be used in this paper. Readers who prefer a distinction in terms of “early processing” v. “late processing” or “levels of processing” (Craik & Lockhart, 1972) are encouraged to substitute those terms. The equivalence of these distinctions is one of the main points of the paper.
Copyright 0 1976 by Academic Press, Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved. Printed in Great Britain
85
86
MURRAY GLANZER
continuous end peak, a step function appears. Words in the last group are recalled equally well, forming a step or plateau at a very high level. Words in the next to the last group often form a second step at a lower level. The same step function is seen in the Bower and Winzenz (1969) data for immediate ordered recall of grouped number sequences (their Figure 7, P. 7). 2. Related words in a list that is presented in a monotone, that is, without intonation grouping, also produce an increase in free recall. This increase is, by contrast, an effect solely on long-term store or secondary memory. When associates or semantically related words appear in a list there is an increase in the amount recalled. The increase is, however, an increase in the recall of early list items, the words retrieved from long-term store. Estimation of the effect of word relations on the amount held in short-term store finds no effect. (Craik & Levy, 1970; Glanzer & Schwartz, 1971; Glanzer, 1972). 3. Related words and intonation grouping interact. The interaction depends on the way in which the two factors are coordinated. There is only one set of data relevant to this assertion. Bower and Springston (1970) found that the immediate recall of letter strings increased when temporal grouping coincided with meaningful letter sequences, for example, FBI. That finding can be viewed as indirect support for the assertion. There are other data that indicate that intonation grouping interacts with other linguistic factors such as the phonemic legality of sequences of letters (Bower & Springston, 1970) or indicators of grammatical structure (O’Connell, Turner, & Onuska, 1968). Those data, however, are more remotely related to the assertion. One of the main aims of the present study is to obtain directly relevant data. The three assertions above are congruent with a general, linguistic processing hypothesis concerning memory (Glanzer, 1972, pp. 186-189; Glanzer & Razel, 1974, pp. 129-130)2. The hypothesis asserts that the
stages evidenced in memory tasks reflect stages in linguistic processing. Short-term store reflects the early processing, long-term store later processing. The three assertions outlined above fit into this view in the following way. Grouping sets up a tentative unit in shortterm store for further analysis. This tentative unit is recoverable from short-term store as a unit, as evidenced by the increase in recall of grouped items from the end of the list. It is also evidenced by the special, forward recall order found in the recall of those grouped items from the end of the list (Gianutsos, 1972).3 If the tentative unit set up by the grouping corresponds to a conceptual or linguistic structure in long-term store, then the grouped short-term store unit is converted to a long-term store unit, with the advantage of a pre-set structure. If, however, the correspondence does not exist, then no such unit can be formed immediately in long-term store.4 Moreover, as new items enter short-term store, the tentative short-term store unit is lost. The two experiments reported below explore the interaction of intonation grouping with word relations. The first experiment establishes the effect of coordination of intonation grouping with meaning relations between words. It also shows that the effect is on longterm store. The second experiment analyzes this interaction effect further and shows that the effect is restricted to long-term store. EXPERIMENT I
The purpose of this experiment was to determine whether intonation grouping interacts with word relations in the recall of words. ‘A very similar argument has been presented by Neisser, Hoenig and Goldstein (1969) on the basis of the effects of grouping on memory. 3 Under monotone presentation, words from the end of the list are recalled in a mixed order. Under grouped presentation they are recalled in the order of presentation. ’ The subject then has to construct a larger unit on the basis of the individual words presented or work with the individual words.
GROUPING
AND
RELATED
The focus here was on effects in long-term store. Method
Subjects listened to lists of nouns with marked intonation grouping and then recalled the words. Included in the lists were pairs of related words. Half of these related word pairs were coordinated or in phase with the intonation grouping. Half were out of phase with the intonation grouping. A sample arrangement is shown below. A series of 18 lists, each 24 words in length, was presented to the subjects by means of a tape recorder. The words were recorded at 1.5 set rate with an intonation pattern that grouped them into triplets. The intonation pattern of each triplet could be characterized, generally, as follows : high, using pitch on the first word; medium, rising pitch on the second word; and low, falling pitch on the third word. Within each list were four pairs of related words, the pair members separated by one intervening word. Two pairs were placed so that both members fell within a single group. These will be called in-phase pairs. Two pairs were placed so that the members fell in two different, neighboring groups. These will be called out-of-phase pairs. A section of a sample list is the following: kite, guest, enemy/ page, drink, gravel1 square, frost, triangle/ shark, chair, fish/ stool, cotton, state/ cloth, dough . . . The slashes indicate groupings. The words square-triangle and shark--sh are in-phase pairs; chair-stool and cotton-cloth are out-of-phase pairs. Across
the 18 lists nine in-phase pairs appeared at Positions 7 and 9, 10 and 12, 13 and 15, 16 and 18, for a total of thirty-six in-phase pairs. Similarly, nine out-of-phase pairs appeared at Positions 5 and 7, 8 and 10, 11 and 13,14and 16. Materials. Seventy-two pairs of related nouns were used in the lists. Each related pair consisted of a stimulus word and one of its associates, drawn from a variety of word
WORDS
IN FREE RECALL
87
association norms. The word-pairs were all paradigmatic associates consisting of either a subordinate-superordinate pair, like clarinet and instrument, or a coordinate pair like hawk and eagle. The mean word frequency count (KuEera-Francis, 1967) was 59; the mean word syllable length was 1.6. The filler words consisted of 288 nouns, matched with the related words with respect to mean word frequency count and number of syllables per word. Two sets of lists were recorded using the same word pairs and filler words. The two sets of lists differed in the following ways: (a) The filler items were independently randomized in the two sets of lists, and (b) the word pairs were reversed in their assignments. Word pairs that were placed in phase in Set 1 were placed out of phase in Set 2 and vice versa. Half of the subjects were tested on Set 1, the other half on Set 2. Subjects. The subjects were 30 college students who participated to fulfill a course requirement. They were assigned at random to the two sets of lists. Procedure. The subjects were first given free recall instructions and two practice lists of the same length and form as the main lists. Following this they were given the 18 main lists. Each subject was tested individually. After each list the subject was given one minute to write the words he could recall. Results
The results for the two sets of lists were first compared. Since they did not differ in any marked way, the results were pooled for the analyses below. The overall results are shown in Fig. 1. The unrelated filler items yield a serial position curve that is normal except for the end peak. Instead of the smoothly rising end peak usually found in free recall, the curve in Fig. 1 displays the step function in the end peak that characterizes free recall with grouped presentation (Gianutsos, 1972). The last group, Positions 22, 23, and 24, form one step. The
88
MURRAY
1.00 .90
-
RELATED
IN
-
RELATED OUT UNRELATED
fs .50F :: ia ‘40 .305 z- .eo.10
t I
1
I
I
3
I
I
I
6
I
I
I,
9
SERIAL
I
I
I2
I
I
I
15
I,
!
1.3
I,
I
21
I,,
E4
POSITION
FIG. 1. Probability of recall as a function of serial position for related words in phase with the intonation grouping (RELATED IN), related words out of phase (RELATED OUT), and unrelated words. Note that some serial positions did not have certain classes of word types. For example, there were no unrelated words at Positions 7, lo,13 and 36.
next to last group, Positions 19, 20, and 21, form the other step. The curves for the related words lie well above the baseline for unrelated words in Fig. 1. Moreover, the curve for related words that are in phase, that is, both related words falling within a single intonation grouping, is higher than for related words that are out of phase. The mean proportion of unrelated words recalled in positions 4 to 18 is .14, for related out of phase is .25 and for related in phase is .31. The simplest analysis is that of the overall means for the in-phase versus the out-of-phase positions. Analysis of variance of these means finds the effect of the coordination significant, F(1, 29) = 12.07, p < .005.
The analysis above is based on data from all eight in-phase and all eight out-of-phase
GLANZER
positions although the two conditions have only four positions in common, as can be seen in Fig. 1. A parallel statistical analysis that considers only the positions that were common to the two conditions-7,10,13, and 16-gives essentially the same results, $‘(I, 29) = 18.34, p < .0005. The difference between related and unrelated words does not require extensive analysis. Comparison of the mean number of words recalled for positions 4-18 for the unrelated filler words and related words for each subject shows the following. Every subject recalled fewer unrelated filler words than in-phase related words. The probability of this occurring by chance, is using the binomial, (.5)30 or less than 10b9. Twentyeight of 30 subjects recalled fewer filler words than out-of-phase related words. The probability of this occurring by chance is 466(.5)30 or less than 10F6. Discussion
The results support the idea that the grouping interacts with the relations of the words. Moreover, the effect of this interaction is on long-term store since the section of the serial position curve that precedes the end peak is clearly affected. Whether there is also an effect on short-term store remains to be determined. The next experiment is, in part, concerned with that question.
EXPERIMENT
II
Experiment I demonstrated that word relations and intonation grouping interact. The purpose of the present experiment was twofold. One was to examine the nature of the interaction further by comparing the effect of grouping with monotone presentation. The other was to examine the specificity of the effect with respect to long-term and shortterm store. Groups of four words were used here instead of the groups of three used in Experiment I.
GROUPING
AND
RELATED
Method The method was basically the same as that in Experiment I, except for the addition of an ungrouped, monotone presentation condition. The subjects were equally divided into two groups. Both groups heard and recalled a series of free recall lists, each consisting of 24 nouns presented at a 1.5 set rate. One group heard the lists grouped, segmented into six intonation groups of four words each. The intonation pattern for the four words in a group was, generally, as follows: first word, high rising; second word, mid-level; third word, mid-level; fourth word, mid-level to low falling. The other group heard the same lists of words recorded in a monotone. Each list contained four related pairs of words. The serial position of the related pairs was systematically varied across lists. The subjects first heard and recalled two practice lists. Then they were given 20 main lists. Materials. Eighty pairs of related nouns were used, the 72 used in Experiment I plus eight new associated pairs. The filler words were those used in Experiment I with seven substitutions and 22 additional words. Members of a related word pair were either coordinate pairs, such as, barley and oats, or subordinate-superordinate pairs, such as copper and metal. The matching of the unrelated filler words and the associated words with respect to word frequency and number of syllables per word was maintained. Four related word pairs were placed in each word list with one filler word intervening between the pair members. Two pairs were in phase with the grouping and two were out of phase. Across the 20 lists the related words were placed in every position except Positions 1 and 24. This gave the same number of related words, four in phase and four out of phase, at every position between 4 and 21. Within each list the related words were placed so that one of the four began at each of the four possible positions in the word groups. This means that the first word of one pair would be the first word in one group, the first word of another
WORDS
IN FREE RECALL
89
pair would be the second word in another group, and so on. A sample list is the following: dot, mist, cofee, blood/ tea, butter$y, school, bee/ rod, parachute, age, earth/ label, planet, gear, saddle/ joy, gypsy, sorrow, bag/ jury, harbor, army, picture. The in-phase pairs in this list are butterfly-bee, joy-sorrow. The out-of-phase pairs are cofee-tea, earthplanet. Three different randomized sets of lists were constructed within the constraints indicated above. Related words were randomly assigned to in-phase and out-of-phase positions for each of the three list series. Another, matched set of three list series was constructed by reversing the assignments of the related word pairs to in-phase and out-of-phase conditions, that is, each in-phase pair became an out-of-phase pair, and vice versa. Each series of lists was recorded both with intonation grouping and without intonation grouping, in a monotone. The terms in-phase and out-of-phase, of course, have no real meaning for the monotone lists. Subjects. The subjects were 60 college students. Thirty were paid volunteers, 30 were students fulfilling course requirements. Five paid subjects were randomly assigned to each of the six grouped list series and to each of the six ungrouped series. The same was done with the unpaid subjects. Results The overall results are shown in Fig. 2. The main findings are the following. 1. There were more grouped in-phase words recalled than grouped out-of-phase words. This replicates the main finding of Experiment I. 2. The number of ungrouped related words recalled falls between the number of in-phase related words and out-of-phase related words recalled. 3. The grouped lists show the characteristic step function in the end peak, the ungrouped lists do not. This finding replicates preceding findings.
90
MURRAY 1.00
r
.90 -
.80-
-
RELATED RELATED
IN OUT
*----a -
RELATED MONO UNRELATED GRPD
*----a
UNRELATED
MONO
I I I I I I I I / I I I, I I I I I I I I I t I, 1 4 8 12 16 20 24
SERIAL
POSITION
FIG. 2. Probability of recall as a function of serial position for related words in phase with the intonation grouping (RELATED IN), related words out of phase (RELATED OUT), and ungrouped or monotone related words (RELATED MONO). Also shown are the serial position curves for unrelated words under both grouped and monotone presentation.
4. There is no interaction effect of grouping and word relations in the end peak. The interaction effect is an effect on long-term store only. The first step in analyzing the data was to carry out an overall analysis of variance for Positions 4 through 21, the positions at which all the experimental conditions were represented. The specific comparisons that are of interest were then made. The overall mean proportion of words recalled was .28 for both the grouped and ungrouped lists. This is in agreement with earlier findings (Gianutsos, 1972) that the positive effects of grouping do not appear in the early list positions. Within the grouped condition, the mean proportion of in-phase related words recalled was .40, out-of-phase .33. The difference between these two conditions is statistically
GLANZER
significant, 41, 58) = 12.80, p < .OOl. Within the ungrouped condition the corresponding sets of related words have the same mean proportion, .37 and .37. This proportion for the ungrouped related words lies midway between the proportions for the grouped in-phase and grouped out-of-phase words. Comparison of the grouped in-phase words with the combined ungrouped related words gives F(1, 58) = 3.30, p < .lO. The parallel comparison of the grouped out-of-phase words with the ungrouped related words gives F(1, 58) = 5.36,~ < .025. The effect of grouping in producing a step function ‘in the end peak can be seen by comparing the serial position curves for the unrelated words in the grouped and ungrouped conditions. The step is quite clear in the last group covering Positions 21-24. In the grouped condition the proportions are all high and form an array with near zero slope-.86, .77, .82, .94. In the monotone condition the same four positions are lower on the average and form the usual monotonic, rising array-.46, .64, .84, .94. The difference in the next to last group, Positions 17-20, is less clear, appearing only in the slopes of the two corresponding arrays. To examine the role of the interaction between grouping and word relations in short-term store, the proportions of recalled words were compared for Positions 17-21. These are the final positions that have both in-phase and out-of-phase related words. They are also positions that show the end-peak rise. The mean proportion of in-phase words recalled in these positions is .5 1, out-of-phase .48. The difference between the two conditions is no longer significant here, F(1, 29) < 1. A more elaborate analysis that corrects the proportions above to estimate the amount held in short-term store alone (see Glanzer, 1972, p. 138) supports the statement that there is no effect of the coordination of grouping and word relations on short-term store. The interaction is a long-term store effect. The significant difference found in the overall
GROUPING
AND
RELATED
analysis reported earlier between the in-phase and out-of-phase pairs is determined by the differences in Positions 4-16, the positions reflecting output from long-term store.
WORD
IN FREE RECALL
91
is the effective one, in tasks such as the ones used here, remains to be demonstrated.5 Ryan’s (1969a, 1969b) findings do not support the selection of spacing as the sole effective factor. Discussion The usual generalization about grouping The results above indicate that the intonadrawn from past findings is that grouping tion grouping acts as a selective filter, emphasi- improves recall. The present study replaces zing the relation between words that fall in that broad generalization with two morethe same intonation group, suppressing the specific statements. relation between words that fall in different 1. Grouping per se improves recall from intonation groups. This would be a natural short-term store. 2. Grouping that is in phase with meaning result of the kind of linguistic processing outlined earlier in which the intonation group relations or, more generally, linguistic relasets up a tentative unit for processing. tions, between list items also improves recall The fact that the ungrouped related pairs from long-term store. fall between the in-phase grouped and the Most of the work reported in the literature out-of-phase grouped pairs also fits what is has been concerned with immediate recall of known about the subject’s handling of lists of relatively short lists of items (Ryan, 1969a, words. The subject sets up his own intonation 1969b; Wickelgren, 1964). Those tasks stronggroupings when they are not presented in the ly reflect output from short-term store. The material. This can be heard when the subject results of the studies support Statement 1 reads off or repeats a list of words. Such a above. When longer lists of unrelated words subject-determined grouping would be ex- are used, as in the present study and the pected, whatever its form, to be in phase with studies by Gianutsos (1972), grouping imsome of the related pairs and out of phase proves recall only for the last few list items, the with other pairs. The average of those two items retrieved from short-term store. conditions would give mean proportions like There have been reports of some effects of those observed in the related monotone curve grouping on long-term store. Bower and of Fig. 2. Winzenz (1969) found, for example, that when The same point explains why grouping has number series were repeated with the same so little effect on the recall of lists of “unregrouping in a Hebb task, the subjects learned lated” words. Those lists usually have some the number series. They did not learn them related words near each other. Their effect when the grouping was changed from prewill, however, be split. The recall of those sentation to presentation. This effect occurs, that happen to be in phase with the subject’s however, only with numbers. When random fortuitous groupings is facilitated. The recall letter sequences are given in the same way, of those that happen to be out of phase is subjects do not learn the sequences any faster lowered. On the average, very little positive or with repeated grouping (Laughery & Spector, negative effect will be observable. 1972). The reason for this is, as Laughery and The term intonation grouping has been used 5 Spacing between words differs slightly in the grouphere to refer to a complex of linguistic marking ed and monotone conditions. Measures of the intervals between words in Experiment II showed the following. devices that occur together in natural speechIn the grouped condition the interval after each word pitch, stress, and juncture. Most psychological from the first to the last word in the group, work has tended to focus on the aspect of increased going from a mean of .8 to 1.0 sec. The corresponding juncture, or spacing between items (see also means for the monotone condition stayed constant at Aaronson, 1967). Whether indeed that factor .9 sec.
MURRAY GLANZER
92
Spector point out, that grouped numbers are generally “recodable,” that is, can be related to each other in a way that arbitrary sequences of a letter cannot be. Another way to state this is to say that any sequence of numbers, except perhaps one that starts with zero, forms a grammatically acceptable unit that can be selected by intonation grouping. No rules are violated by a randomly drawn sequence such as 24 or 775. The same statement does not hold for any sequence of letters or any sequence of words. Rules are violated by a randomly drawn sequence of letters such as mcq, or a randomly drawn sequence of words. The data fit the following picture. Intonation grouping sets up initial processing units. Those units that match long-term structural units are selected and registered. The units in this study were semantic units. The same selection and registration has been observed when the units correspond to phonemically legal sequences (Bower & Springston, 1970) or to syntactic regularities (O’Connell, Turner & Onuska, 1968). The effects observed here, therefore, reflect the workings of a general linguistic processing mechanism, a mechanism that selects units at the phonemic sequence, syntactic and semantic levels. REFERENCES AARONSON, D. Temporal factors in perception and short-term memory. Psychological Bulletin, 1967, 67, 13&144. ATKINSON, R. C., & SEIFFRIN, R. M. Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In K. W. Spence & J. T. Spence (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation: search and theory, Vol. II. New
Advances
York:
in re-
Academic
Press, 1968. Pp. 89-195. G. H., & SPRINGSTON, F. Pauses as recoding points in letter series. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970,83,421-430. BOWER, G. H., & WINZENZ, D. Group structure coding and memory for digit series. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969, 80, (2, Part 2) 1-17. BOWER,
CRAIK, F. I. M., & LEVY, B. A. Semantic and acoustic information in primary memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970,86, 77-82. CRAIK, F. I. M., & LOCKHART, R. S. Levels of processing : A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1972, l&671-684. GUNUTSOS, R. Free recall of grouped words. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1972,95,419-428. GLANZER, M. Storage mechanisms in recall. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivations
Advances
in
research
and
theory,
Vol. V. New York: Academic Press, 1972. Pp. 1299193. GLANZER, M., & RAVEL, M. The size of the unit in short-term storage. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1974,13, 114-131. GLANZER, M., & SCHWARTZ, A. Mnemonic structure in free recall: Differential effects on STS and LTS. Journal
of Verbal
Learning
1971,10,194-198. K&ERA, H., & FRANCIS,
and
Verbal
Behavior,
W. N. Computational
English. Providence, R. I. : Brown University Press, 1967. LAUGHERY, K. R., &SPECTOR, A. The roles of recoding and rhythm in memory organization. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1972,94,4148. analysis
of present-day
LIEBERMAN,
P. Intonation,
Cambridge:
American
perception,
and
language.
M.I.T. Press, 1967.
Psychology. New York: Crofts, 1967. NELSSER, U., HOENIG, Y. J., &GOLDSTEIN, E. Perceptual organization in the prefix effect. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1969, 8, 424429. O’CONNELL, D. C., TURNER, E. .4., & ONUSKA, L. A. Intonation, grammatical structure and contextual association in immediate recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1968,7,110-l 16. RYAN, J. Grouping and short-term memory: Different means and patterns of grouping. Quarterly Journal of ExperimentalPsychology, 1969,21,137-147. (a) RYAN, J. Temporal grouping, rehearsal and shortterm memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969,21,148-155. (b) WICKELGREN, W. A. Size of rehearsal group and shortterm memory. Journal of ExperimentalPsychology, 1964,68,413-419. NEISSER,
U.
Cognitive
Appleton-Century
(Received August 22,1975)