This article was downloaded by: [McMaster University] On: 28 December 2014, At: 10:48 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
The Journal of Genetic Psychology: Research and Theory on Human Development Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vgnt20
Comparison of Normal and Learning Disabled Children on Short-Term Memory Recall and Selective Attention Lee Swanson
a
a
University of Northern Colorado , USA Published online: 04 Sep 2012.
To cite this article: Lee Swanson (1979) Comparison of Normal and Learning Disabled Children on Short-Term Memory Recall and Selective Attention, The Journal of Genetic Psychology: Research and Theory on Human Development, 135:1, 155-156, DOI: 10.1080/00221325.1979.10533427 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00221325.1979.10533427
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions
The Journal of Ccnctic Psychology, 1979, 135, 155-156.
COMPARISON OF NORMAL AND LEARNING DISABLED CHILDREN O N SHORT-TERM MEMORY RECALL AND SELECTIVE ATTENTION*’ University of Northern Colorado
Downloaded by [McMaster University] at 10:48 28 December 2014
LEESWANSON Although children with learning disabilities have been characterized by clinicians and teachers as deficient in short-term memory and selective attention, relatively few comparisons of learning disabled and normal children on these specific measures have been done.2 The present study examines the relationship between central and incidental recall and selective attention comparing normal and learning disabled children. Ss (10 males and five females in each group), included 15 learning disabled (ZQ = 100.3, S D = 6.93; CA = 9.4, SD = .26) and 15 normal (ZQ = 104.1, SD = 5.87; C A 9.5, SD = .31) children from the Columbia, South Carolina, School District. The randomly selected two groups did not differ significantly (F < 1) on ZQ or CA . Hagen’s and Huntsman’s3 central-incidental recall task was used in this study. Stimuli consisted of six cards with animals on the bottom half and furniture objects on the top half. In the central recall task each S was instructed to pay attention to animals only for the six probed serial positions. The incidental recall phase was administered immediately after 12 trials. Similar cards depicting animal and furniture objects were used in a matching task. Incidental recall scores were based on correct matching of items to serial position. The proportion correct constituted S’s recall score. A measure of selective attention efficiency (proportion of correct responses minus proportion of correct incidental response^)^ was then computed.
* Received in the Editorial Office, Provincetown, Massachusetts, on January 27, 1978. Copyright, 1979, by The Journal Press. The author is indebted to Richland School District, Columbia, South Carolina. Requests for reprints should be sent to the author at the address shown at the end of the article. * Tarver, S., Hallahan, D., Cohen, S., & Kauffman, J. The development of visual selective attention and verbal rehearsal in learningdisabled b0ys.J. Learn. Disabil., 1977, 10,491-500. Hagan, J., & Huntsman, N. Selective attention in mental retardates. Devel. Psychol., 1971, 5, 151-160. Hallahan, D., Kauffman, J., & Ball, D. Developmental trends in recall of central and incidental auditory material. J . Ezper. Child Psychol., 1974, 17,409-421. 155
Downloaded by [McMaster University] at 10:48 28 December 2014
156
JOURNAL OF GENETIC PSYCHOLOGY
A 2 (group) X 6 (serial positions) analysis of variance on repeated measures indicated no significant group (F < 1) or serial position (F = 1.04, df = 5/140, p > .lo) effects. A similar analysis of variance on proportion correct for incidental recall scores indicated significant differences on serial position effects (F = 2 . 5 3 , df = 5/140, p < .05) but not between groups (F < 1). Since the interaction was not significant (F = 1.30, df = 5/140, p > .lo), scores were collapsed across group and serial position, and a Newman-Keuls Test was administered. Serial position main effects were due to significant ( p < .05) primacy (serial position 1 and 2 > 3 and 4) and recency (5 and 6 > 3 and 4) performance. Similar ANOVA measures of the selective attention index indicated again only significant performances between serial positions (F = 2 . 2 9 , df = 5/140, p < .05) but not for the group or group X serial position interaction ( F < 1). Present results, consistent with Hagen and Huntsman’s findings with normals and retardates, matched on M A , indicated no differences in selective attention. Further, central and incidental recall was not a differential variable in normal and learning disabled children’s performance. Therefore, the implication that environmental or ecological factors play a critical role in learning disability assessment of recall and attentional differences is a basis for further investigation.
College of Education School of Special Education and Rehabilitation The University of Northern Colorado Greeley, Colorado 30639
The Journal of Genetic Psychology: Research and Theory on Human Development Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vgnt20
Comparison of Normal and Learning Disabled Children on Short-Term Memory Recall and Selective Attention Lee Swanson
a
a
University of Northern Colorado , USA Published online: 04 Sep 2012.
To cite this article: Lee Swanson (1979) Comparison of Normal and Learning Disabled Children on Short-Term Memory Recall and Selective Attention, The Journal of Genetic Psychology: Research and Theory on Human Development, 135:1, 155-156, DOI: 10.1080/00221325.1979.10533427 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00221325.1979.10533427
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions
The Journal of Ccnctic Psychology, 1979, 135, 155-156.
COMPARISON OF NORMAL AND LEARNING DISABLED CHILDREN O N SHORT-TERM MEMORY RECALL AND SELECTIVE ATTENTION*’ University of Northern Colorado
Downloaded by [McMaster University] at 10:48 28 December 2014
LEESWANSON Although children with learning disabilities have been characterized by clinicians and teachers as deficient in short-term memory and selective attention, relatively few comparisons of learning disabled and normal children on these specific measures have been done.2 The present study examines the relationship between central and incidental recall and selective attention comparing normal and learning disabled children. Ss (10 males and five females in each group), included 15 learning disabled (ZQ = 100.3, S D = 6.93; CA = 9.4, SD = .26) and 15 normal (ZQ = 104.1, SD = 5.87; C A 9.5, SD = .31) children from the Columbia, South Carolina, School District. The randomly selected two groups did not differ significantly (F < 1) on ZQ or CA . Hagen’s and Huntsman’s3 central-incidental recall task was used in this study. Stimuli consisted of six cards with animals on the bottom half and furniture objects on the top half. In the central recall task each S was instructed to pay attention to animals only for the six probed serial positions. The incidental recall phase was administered immediately after 12 trials. Similar cards depicting animal and furniture objects were used in a matching task. Incidental recall scores were based on correct matching of items to serial position. The proportion correct constituted S’s recall score. A measure of selective attention efficiency (proportion of correct responses minus proportion of correct incidental response^)^ was then computed.
* Received in the Editorial Office, Provincetown, Massachusetts, on January 27, 1978. Copyright, 1979, by The Journal Press. The author is indebted to Richland School District, Columbia, South Carolina. Requests for reprints should be sent to the author at the address shown at the end of the article. * Tarver, S., Hallahan, D., Cohen, S., & Kauffman, J. The development of visual selective attention and verbal rehearsal in learningdisabled b0ys.J. Learn. Disabil., 1977, 10,491-500. Hagan, J., & Huntsman, N. Selective attention in mental retardates. Devel. Psychol., 1971, 5, 151-160. Hallahan, D., Kauffman, J., & Ball, D. Developmental trends in recall of central and incidental auditory material. J . Ezper. Child Psychol., 1974, 17,409-421. 155
Downloaded by [McMaster University] at 10:48 28 December 2014
156
JOURNAL OF GENETIC PSYCHOLOGY
A 2 (group) X 6 (serial positions) analysis of variance on repeated measures indicated no significant group (F < 1) or serial position (F = 1.04, df = 5/140, p > .lo) effects. A similar analysis of variance on proportion correct for incidental recall scores indicated significant differences on serial position effects (F = 2 . 5 3 , df = 5/140, p < .05) but not between groups (F < 1). Since the interaction was not significant (F = 1.30, df = 5/140, p > .lo), scores were collapsed across group and serial position, and a Newman-Keuls Test was administered. Serial position main effects were due to significant ( p < .05) primacy (serial position 1 and 2 > 3 and 4) and recency (5 and 6 > 3 and 4) performance. Similar ANOVA measures of the selective attention index indicated again only significant performances between serial positions (F = 2 . 2 9 , df = 5/140, p < .05) but not for the group or group X serial position interaction ( F < 1). Present results, consistent with Hagen and Huntsman’s findings with normals and retardates, matched on M A , indicated no differences in selective attention. Further, central and incidental recall was not a differential variable in normal and learning disabled children’s performance. Therefore, the implication that environmental or ecological factors play a critical role in learning disability assessment of recall and attentional differences is a basis for further investigation.
College of Education School of Special Education and Rehabilitation The University of Northern Colorado Greeley, Colorado 30639
