Some Memory Span Test Problems
The Psychological Clinic Copyright, 1924, by Lightner Witmer, Editor Vol. XV, No. 8 November, 1924/
An Analytical Study at the College-Adult Level :Author:R. A. Brotemarkle, Ph.D.
Instructor in Psychology, University of Pennsylvania CASES Those tested were students at the University of Pennsylvania, rrien and women from the College, School of Education, Wharton School of Finance, Summer School and Graduate School, taking the first year course in psychology during the sessions of 1919-20 and 1920-21. The chronological age level of the group is adult, average 20-21.
Results of Dr Henry J. Humpstone (3) were gathered from the corresponding classes of previous years and are used in the Standardization of Results. METHOD The Memory Span Tests used were given under the “Standard Conditions” as follows: Experiment No. 1 Memory Span Test for Digits. Group experiment. Selected series; one second interval. Voco-auditory; graphic. Two trials. ?Experiment No. 2 Memory Span Test for Three-letter Words. Group experiment. Selected series; one second interval. Vocoauditory; graphic. Two trials. Experiment No. 3 Memory Span Test for Syllables. Group experiment. Selected sentences. Voco-auditory; graphic. One sentence in each series based on Concrete Visual Imagery, one on Abstract Concepts. Experiment No. 4 Memory Span Test for Ideas. Group experiment. Paragraph from the Stanford Revision of the Binet-Simon Tests (6), found in year XVIII, Superior Adult, beginning “Tests such as we are now making … Paragraph read distinctly; five minutes allowed in which to write ideas. Vocoauditory; graphic. One trial. 230 THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC Experiment No. 5 Memory Span Test for Digits Backward. Group experiment. Selected series; one second interval. Voco-auditory; graphic. Two trials. Experiment No. 6 Memory Span Test or Digits Forward. Individual experiment. Selected series; one second interval. Vocoauditory; vocal. Two trials. Experiment No. 7 Memory Span Test for Digits Forward. Individual experiment. Selected series; immediate reading. Visual; vocal. Two trials. Experiment No. 8 Repeated Memory Span Test for Digits. Given under same conditions as Experiment No. 1 after period of three months. Experiment No. 9 Introspective Study of Memory Span for Digits. Individual experiment. Selected series; one second interval. Voco-auditory; vocal. Two trials. Graphic record. RESULTS The results attained by the original Group Experiments 1, 2, 3, and 4 are the Adult Standards: Experiment No. No. of Maximum Median Mode Mean Minimum Cases 1?Digits… . 1263 12 8 8 8.4 4 2?Three-letter Words.. 1150 8 6 5 5.95 3 3?Syllable s 905 50 30 30 31.1 10 4?Idea s 812 12 5 4 4.92 0 Quintile Rating Digits Three-letter Syllables Ideas words V 10-12 8 35-50 8-12 IV 9 7 30 6-7 III 8 6 30 4-5 II 7 5 30 2-3 1 4-6 3-4 10-25 0-1 The results derived from Experiments 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 will be treated in separate sections. TREATMENT OF RESULTS “IS THE MEMORY SPAN SCORE ATTAINED BY GROUP TESTING INDICATIVE OF THE ACTUAL MEMORY SPAN OF THE INDIVIDUAL?”
In attempting to ascertain the diagnostic value of the Memory Span of the individual it is not enough to assume that the score attained under any given method of testing is the actual memory span of the individual. The first problem of memory span testing challenges the accuracy of the memory span score itself.
Is the memory span score attained by an individual in a group testing indicative of the actual memory span?
This question cannot be answered by a comparison of the Original Group score with other Memory Span Test scores; it requires an analysis of the score or response given, and also an analysis of the stimulus which prompts the given response. Is the stimulus well enough organized to elicit the best possible response, not only quantitatively but also qualitatively? Is the response given amply treated by a single quantitative measure or score?
For clearness of definition the stimulus material must provide “discrete elements” of unitary content, otherwise the parts of the stimulus may not be equal in value. The “discrete elements used in these experiments are digits, three-letter words, integrated syllables in sentence form, and integrated ideas in paragraph form. In the test for digits, a “serial ordering” whereby a rotation backward or forward, and addition, subtraction, multiplication or division is suggested, must be avoided. In three-letter words, the use of words closely associated in sound or experience must be avoided. In the sentences, the use of confusing words or imagery must be avoided. In the “ideas” test, the entire foundation of communicative language is involved, since a letter, a sound, a word, a phrase, a sentence, a paragraph, a chapter, a book make possible the expression of varying numbers of ideas.
The stimulus material must be presented to exclude variations of s?und, breathing and enunciation in the voco-auditory forms of testing, and confusional factors in the visual and kinaesthetic forms. In the case, for instance, of certain colloquial mannerisms of speech, the comparison of original and repeated tests are impossible since the individuals have become accustomed to the original variant factor; nor are they comparable to other tests made under more accurate presentation.
The rate of presentation is more controllable under mechanical ^eans, though the individual rate of discharge of nervous energy adds a variant factor to all vocal stimuli. In the event of a rapid mcrease in the rate of presentation, when the case is of a low grade mentality, the individual will often be able to increase his span Sc?re for digits by one or two measures. When the rate of presentation falls into the error of rhythmic beats a simple form of grouping of digits is suggested to the individual, and is seldom escaped in the longer series of digits.
The problems of the response arouse the fundamental questions of the basis of the memory span as an ability. Kirkpatrick (4) discusses the “tendency to repeat what has been perceived,” which is but a teleological interpretation of the facts between the presenting of a stimulus and the response to the same. The entire question is expressive of the psychological basis of the fact; a “tendency,” a “perceiving,” and a “repeating.” These require a correlative physical basis, with its so-called “pattern” or nervous set, which will explain in more detail the “impulsive” or “mechanical” basis of imitation, and form a basis for the great psychological development of “volitional” or “reflective” imitation as outlined by Calkins (1). Upon any explanation of the response the elicited response does to some measure reveal the normal memory span of the individual.
During the fall of 1921 the first year class in psychology was given a series of experiments in the memory span test for digits with the results as follows:
Memory Span Test For Digits Maximum Median Mode Mean Minimum Original Group Test 12 8 8 8.18 5 (Experiment No. 1) Repetition of Group Test 12 9 9 8.9 5 (Experiment No. 8) Individual Voco-Auditory Test.. 12 8 8 8.07 5 (Experiment No. 6) Individual Visual-Vocal Test. .. 13 9 9 8.8 5 (Experiment No. 7) Group Test For Backward Span. 10 8 8 7.39 4 (Experiment No. 5)
The repetition of the group test was made three months after the original group test, during which time the class had made a thorough study of the memory span test problems, and had the privilege of increasing their scores by any legitimate means whatever. The individual tests and the group test for the digits backward followed at weekly intervals. No marked increase is noted in the group results. In the four experiments for the digit span forward the group results have an almost constant spread in distribution. In the group test for digits backward a decided spread of distribution below the modal tendency is evidence of the difficulty of the backward span. The study of the individual variations in these experiments by the group method points to a relatively small increase of the score in subsequent tests over the original group standing. The variations rom the original group standing are as follows:
Variation from the Original Group Test Score Repetition of Individual Individual Group Test Group Test Voco-Auditory Visual-Vocal Digits a Air. Test Test Backward a ‘Minus Var. 1.51 1.82 1.58 1.85 v- Plus Var…. 1.97 1.27 1.72 1.37 ~v-Variation… 1.32 1.09 1.32 1.35 ^.Difference.. +.72 -.16 +.64 -.88 A study of the individual variations by individual methods shows . a normal group of college adults the extreme variations of the 0rigmal group tests for memory span for digits forward will be largely reduced by subsequent tests to a central or modal tendency of 8-9-10, as the modes of the memory span for digits for adults,?the 8 being a ftiodal tendency indicative of a low memory span; the 9 being a jftodal tendency indicative of a median memory span; and the 10 eing a modal tendency indicative of the high memory span. The act already noted, that the normal variations of the individual sPan score is from 0 to plus or minus 3, further corroborates these ^odal points since the usual variations will not displace the original g anc*ing of low or high scores,?there being but a single variation of 111 the low group; eight variations of 4 in the low, ten of 4 in the high, aild three of 4 in the median.
the case of the backward span for digits it will be noted that ., 6 tendency of the lower score is to vary but not by more than + 2, ?re being but one variation of +3; the median scores varying by - > with the exception of two cases at +3; the high scores varying great extremes, however, there being one variation of ? 6, two of ? ‘ of +4, nine of +3. A study of the two experiments in individual tests will further j^rroborate the indicative value of the memory span score attained any test under standard conditions. The average variation of the ^isual-vocal method over the vocal-auditory being +.76, indicating andmg of about 1 measure higher in the visual tests over the a, whereas the actual variations do not displace the original landing of the results.
Is THE MEMORY SPAN DIAGNOSTIC OF SPECIFIC ABILITIES OR DEFECTS? Of what mental ability is the memory span diagnostic? Is it agnostic of some specific mental ability or defect; and if so, how much are these abilities involved in the definition of memory span? The Table of Distribution for experiments 1, 2, 3, and 4 enable us to settle upon the cases for immediate study, there being a definite curve with the extremes well defined. It is in the extreme low and high scores that we find the actual case problems involved, and for that reason?arrived at by laboratory and clinical experience?the following scores are arbitrarily used to decide the cases for studyLow Memory Span Scores Measure Per cent of Cases
Digits 4-5 3.1 Three-Letter Words 3-4 8.4 Syllables 10-20 4.41 Idea4 0-1 7.42 High Memory Span Scores Digits 12 4.3 Three-Letter Words 8 11.4 Syllables 40-50 3.2 Ideas 9-12 7.74 The quintiles already noted in the standards for memory span scores for college adults are to a large degree indicated by these scores, the first (I) and fifth (V) quintiles of each group being to a large measure used for this study.
In a recent study of The Competency of Fifty College Students, Miller (5) reports a series of mental abilities tests made during the same period of laboratory instruction with the same group. These tests have been sufficiently well standardized for us to note the mental ability or defect involved in each test. The following graphs will show the percentage of cases in which the various abilities or defects are of the same high or low standing as each of the four types of memory span scores. The abilities are correlated to the high span scores; the defects are correlated to the low memory span scores. In the case of the high memory span scores the correlation of the mental abilities varies between 100 percent and 45.46 percent with an average of 76.3 percent. In the case of the low memory span scores the correlation of the mental defects varies between 61-9 percent and 11.21 percent with an average of 36.05 percent. The memory span score is not of consistent diagnostic value for any the specific mental abilities or defects. However, a very definite tendency is discernible in the fact that the scores are more diagnostic of certain groups of mental abilities or defects than others. In the case of the attention factors?observation, distribution of attention, description?and the reproduction factors?LaHguagability, me y? arithmetical proficiency?a more decided tendency o gn value is noted than in the discrimination factois.
Definition of Memory Span
Memory span then is not diagnostic of certain mental abilities ?r defects but is an ability itself which involves the attentiona in an act of immediate reproduction; it is a mental grasp a n?thing more. The grasp is a specific mental ability, limited y High Memory Span Scores t 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 5 AO Mental Abilities o2oo?M ? ? 5 S B H ? g 2 ? 2 Si > 3 ? & g I | g 2 ? ^ ? S F R ? a S ? g s ? m EiH y ? fa p* 5 ^ PS ? ~ ^ w & ^ w A J o q q p A O ^ -Attention ) (?Discrimination?) ( Reproduction Low Memory Span Scores Mental Defects Memory Span For Digits Memory Span For Three-Letter Words Memory Span For Syllables : Memory Span For Ideas employment of other defective abilities, but not primarily dependent upon them.
Humpstone (2) has given us a clear definition of memory span, involving the stimulus, mental process and response: “Memory span is the ability to grasp a number of discrete elements in a given moment of attention and reproduce the same immediately.” The stimulus and response have been noted; it is the mental process with which we are here concerned.
A mental process involving the field of attention in a spatial existence of successive events is not easily analyzed, and yet it is of sufficient complexity to involve any and all of the factors of the attentional abilities. The analytical concentration of attention, the persistent concentration of attention, its distribution, and its “motivated” factors of alertness and interest may readily play their independent or component part in the “given moment.”
And again, though memory span is not memory, as shown by Humpstone (2), it not only makes use of the attentional field in the first instance, but of the various imagery fields and various types and laws of association, at the same time relying upon its own grasping power to secure the material for immediate reproduction.
IS THE MEMORY SPAN DIAGNOSTIC OF THE COMPLEXITY OF MENTAL ORGANIZATION?
The memory span is of diagnostic value not alone because of its own simplicity, but also because of its use of the numerous mental factors of the attentional, imagal and associational fields?its use of mental complexity.
While no test will give us a rating of the general mental organization of the individual, this intellectual standing may be readily subsumed under the general grades of the college courses. The various factors of marking and grading are not to be considered constant, even in the individual?much less in the group?yet in the summation of grades much of the variance will be smoothed out. The grading system used at the University of Pennsylvania is a rough quintile system using the letter D for the upper of V quintile, G for IV, P for III, N for II, and F for I.
Two summation grades have been chosen for comparison with the memory span scores or standing. First, the psychology grade attained in the first year course, which is the combined judgment of from four to seven instructors and professors, who have had the ^pportunity to analyze the individual’s work from various angles; indivV}001^-’ C0^eSe grade which is the combined standing of the Ua *n courses taken to date, and is the summation gnient of numerous teachers.
fcosis h CaS? psychol?gy grades the accuracy of the diaga rati ^f?o”T memory sPan sc?res ranges from 67-93 per cent, or from accuvn ? ~^? a ratio of 13-1; by the high memory span scores the of 2-1 C^an?es from 53-64 per cent, or from a ratio of 1-1 to a ratio Qierno ? ^?W memory sPan scores having a ratio of 5.5-1, the highcase o?;rn SCOres havinS a ratio of 1.75-1 on the average. In the of 44?7k 6 co^e&e grades the low memory span scores have a range mein pei cent, or from a ratio of 1-1 to a ratio of 3-1; the high ratio<of’QS^,ai1 SCOres ^ave a range from 78-90 per cent, or from a ratio of a ra^? ^le ^ovv memory span scores have a 6 c i ? and the high memory span scores have a ratio of on the average.
The Individual Cases
diagn^t^8 mil?k may adduced from the group results, the real studv?SfC Va*Ue of memory span is to be found in the individual standin? lT80 pro^lems- cases indicated as of high or low c?ttiDllrfS ? memoiT span scores a limited number of cases were are ^ ^ m ma^er^a^ and data for individual treatment, and these all theeSen^6C^ aS ^?^ows: -^n the low digit span scores are included low in CaS?S vv^ a l?w digit span score, and also inclusive of all those low th 6l^10r ^ree-letter word, syllable, or idea spans; in the three er w?rd span scores are included all those having low aricj ,6 ei w?rd spans not already included under the former group, spans S^,^0Se having low syllable or idea spans with three-letter spans same ordering is followed under the titles of low syllable three 1 ?W ^ea spans’ high *dea spans, high syllable spans, high letter F WOrc sPans> and high digit spans. The sex is noted by ratin ? m?de> M for male. The cases are numbered, and quintile Com 1 PVen in the summation scores for mental abilities, mental recordGXl ^ an^ ^ra^na^^^ty as taken from the various laboratory 5.5-4 S’ college grardes are noted as high for a standing of In^th^111 ^ ^ an(^ ^ow ^or ^ down the quintile scale. sPan sc 6 *nc^v^ual case the number in italics indicates that the 0r low T SUppor^s diagnosis of the oi’iginal score whether high that th n ^?W Span scores number in bold face indicates 6 score does not support the original score.
The following ratio of diagnostic value is found: The low digit span has a diagnostic accuracy of 7-1; the low three-letter word span 4-1; the low syllable span 24-1; the low ideas span 13-1; the high digit span 2.6-1; the high three-letter word span 3.1-1; the high syllable span 2-1; the high ideas span 3.1-1. The low span scores have an average diagnostic accuracy of 12-1; the high span scores an average of 2.25-1.
The low memory span is far more pronounced in its diagnostic accuracy than the high memory span. This is true even where an attempt made to explain many of the “Not Diagnostic” cases, since most of the explanations possible will be in favor of the low memory spans. For example cases 14, 15 and 36 have a “limited span” with a high degree of trainability and are thus able to make a greater use of the fundamental abilities at hand. Other cases, as for example, cases 34 and 92, may be found to be weighted more accurately by othei scores than those under which they have been originally listed. Low Digit Span Cases
CO F M M F M F M F F M 12 2 w | o w p a S o ? O GQ Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low High Spans 30 25 25 30 25 25 30 30 30 35 35
Remarks
Three-letter word span low. Three-letter word span low. Syllable span low. Committee Dropped fro1,1 College. Three-letter word span low. Three-letter word span low. (Repeated course in Summer School with same scores in all spans.) Attention defects. Observation and Attention defects. Imagability and Definition defects. Trainability defect. Observation defect. Motivation defect: Lazy. Description defect. Psychology, grades, N. P. Question college grades. SOME MEMORY SPAN TEST PROBLEMS 239 Low Digit Span Cases?Continued Remarks Drudge. Question grades. Takes courses in Summer School gradually. Three-letter word span low. Ideas span low. Not Diagnostic. “Limited span” without grouping. Three-letter word span low. Abilities defects-General. Question college grades. Not Diagnostic. “Limited span” without grouping. H ? M 17| 5J 18 3 to 19 2 Hi I 20 2 to I 21 i 22 I M Low Three-Letter Word Span Cases 4 323[ 3 ?| 3_ 24 Nl I 25 4__| 26 H ? S 3 |J J ^ 3Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Spans SO 25 30 30 30 30 30 25 25 30 Remarks Ideas span low. Syllable span low. Motivation defect. Committee Dropped from College. Trainability defect. Cramped abilities. Description low. Trainability defect. Dropped from college. Abilities high. Complexities low. Drudge type. Cramped abilities. Trainability plus. Description low. Use of abilities low. Cramped abilities. Trainability low. 240 THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC Low Three-Letter Word Span Cases?Continued a ? 3 V CO i-i H <J ? O w O < O M 27 3- 4 M 28 2 2 M 29 3- 3 M 30 2 2 M 31 3- 3 F 32 1 1 33 3 3M 34 3- 3 M 35 3 4 F 36 2 3M 37 2- 3 F 38 3- 3 M 39 3- 4 F 40 3 3 F 41 3- 4M 42 4 3F 43 2 3M 44 2 4F 45 3 3 M 46 2 3F 47 2 3 M 48 3 3M 49 2 4M 50 H S o 5 B Q a s ^ < U cc Low Low Low Low Low Low High High High High High High High High Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Spans too s 7 7 11 10 7 8 6 12 7 9 6 8 7 11 11 35 30 30 35 10 30 30 30 25 30 30 30 30 30 35 25 30 30 25 25 30 35 35 10 4 5
Remarks Observation and Discrimination defects. Consistent defects. Consistent defects. Committee Dropped from College. Idea span low. Syllable span low. Ideas span low. Committee Dropped from College. Syllable span low. Ideas span low. (Repeated tests second ye?1 with same scores.) Idea span low. Languagability defect. Drudge type. Not Diagnostic. Not Diagnostic. Question college grades. Not Diagnostic. Motivation: Lazy. Not Diagnostic. Not Diagnostic. Not Diagnostic. Idea span low. Trainability plus. Languagability defect. Trainability defect. Abilities defect. Trainability defect. Abilities defect. Abilities defect. Motivation defect: Lazy. Drudge. Summer School casecourses taken over period 0 years. Dropped from college befare grades given: Excluded fro111 5 courses. SOME MEMORY SPAN TEST PROBLEMS 241 Low Syllable Span Cases h < 5 ? O ^ F 51 3M 52 2M 53 2M 54 l M 55 2 M 56 2 F 57 3M 58 2 P 59 3M 60 3 M 61 2M 62 3M 63 3M 64 3M 65 2M 66 2 M 67 3M 68 3M 69 2F 70 2 M 71 2H 8 o 5 w p ^ 5 o ^ O CO Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low High High High Medium Medium Spans bC 5 10 8 10 9 11 7 7 6 10 Remarks Ideas span low. Description low. Ideas span low. Persistence defect. Probation at time. Ideas span low. Ideas span low. Abilities defect. Committee Dropped from College. Abilities and Trainability defects. Abilities and Trainability defects. Committee Dropped from College. Abilities defect: Attention and Imagation. Abilities defect: Attention and imagation. Abilities defect: Attention and imagation. Abilities defect: Attention, imagation and discrimination. Committee Dropped from College. Abilities defect: Observation and languagability. Abilities defect: Attention, imagation, and discrimination. Abilities defect: Attention and imagation. Question grades. Withdrew from psychology second term. Question grades. Withdrew from psychology second term. Not Diagnostic. Question high grades. Ideas span low. . Personality defect: Babyish and unpleasant. 242 THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC Low Ideas Span Cases OS w s w a ? g M 3 * * I >? m ? M s s s ?< S < m o K og O U H F 72 1 2-1 M 73 2 3- ? M 74 2- 1 1 F 75 3- 2 2 M 76 2 2M 77 4 4 5 F 78 3- 3 4 M 79 3- 3 2 M 80 1 1 1 M 81 3- 3 4 M 82 2 3- ? F 83 2 3-2 M 84 3 3 4 M 85 2- 2M 86 3 3 3 F 87 2 2 1 M 88 ? ? ? M 69 1 90 3M 91 3- 3 5 F 92 3 4 4 F 93 3- 2 3 F 94 2 3 5 M 95 3- 4- 2 M 96 3 4- ? M 97 2- 3 1 M M 99 2 3-3 F 100 2- 1 1 H c S s g ?< .9 E* O m Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low High High High Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Spans bC Q 11 7 7 7 6 6 11 12 6 10 12 8 8 11 7 02 30 30 ? 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 35 25 25 30 30 25 35 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 25 30 30 30
Remarks Abilities defect. Abilities defect: Attention. Abilities defect: Attention and Imagation. Abilities defect: Attention, observation and imagation. Observation low. Trainability defect. Abilities defect: General?. Observation low. Abilities defect: Attention, imagation and discrimination. Observation low. Languagability defect. Dropped from college. Committee Dropped from College. Abilities defect. Committee Dropped from College. Committee Dropped from College. Observation low. Question high grades. Not Diagnostic. Not Diagnostic. Trainability defect. Observation defect. Trainability defect. Description low. Abilities defect: Observation, attention, imagation and discrimination. Abilities defect: Imagation and discrimination. Imagation low. Abilities defect: General?.
High Ideas Span Cases h , ? , 5 * ” ? ? < 3 ? O ^ F 101 2 F 102 4M 103 4 M 104 3 M 105 2 M 106 4F 107 2M 108 3 F 109 4 F 110 4 F Ill 2 34 3 434? W Q ?3 2 O 02 High High High Medium Medium Medium Low High High Medium Spans bC Q 9 10 10 ? 9 10 12 CO 30 30 30 35 ? 30 30 30 40 40 35
Remarks Trainability plus. Observation low. Abilities defect: Discrimination and definition. Question high grades. Not Diagnostic. Abilities defect: Attention, imagation, observation. Not Diagnostic. Languagability defect. Not Diagnostic. Attention low. Trainability low. Abilities defect High Syllable Span Cases ? w n I , * & r* < s ? O ^ M 112 4F 113 3 F 114 4 M 115 4 M 116 4 F 117 3F 118 3F 119 2 F 120 2M 121 2 M 122 3 123 2 H 2 w a r9 ? U 02 High High High High Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Low Spans be Q 10 8 7 10 10 ? 7 10 10 8 8 8
Remarks Distribution of Attention low. Distribution of Attention low. Distribution of Attention low. Languagability low. Not Diagnostic. Not Diagnostic. Abilities defect: Attention, observation, and languagability. Not Diagnostic. Not Diagnostic. Not Diagnostic. High 3-LErrER Word Span Cases ps H P9 t? 3 w w * m H J . w as w & 2 B < pq o ? co O O EH F 124 3 4-1 M 125 4- 3 3 M 126 4 4 4 M 127 3- 4- 5 F 128 3 3 3 M 129 3- 3 2 F 130 5- 4 5 M 131 3-3 4 F 132 2- 3- 1 F 133 3- 3 4 F 134 2 3-4 M 135 4- 4 3 F 136 3 3 3 F 137 4- 3 3 M 138 3- 3 5 F 139 3- 3 ? M 140 3- 3 5 M 141 4 4- 1 F 142 4- 4 4 F 143 3- 3 2 M 144 3 3 3 M 145 3- 3 5 F 146 3 3 5 F 147 2 3-2 F 148 3 4 3 F 149 2 3-4 F 150 2- 2 1 M 151 3 3 5 F 152 3 4-4 M 153 2 2 1 H O O fc u m High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Low Spans 12 12 12 9 9 9 9 11 35 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 35 30 35 30 30 30 35 30 30 30 30 30 35 30 30 30 30 30 30
Remarks Trainability defect. Attention defect. Attention and Observation low. Memory defect. Trainability low. Attention plus. Languagability low. Left college. Attention, memory and definition low. Attention and definition low. Memory and definition low. Definition and languagability low. Memory low. Observation defect. Discrimination, definition and memory defect. Trainability defect. Languagability defect. Attention and memory defect. Left college. Observation low. Definition low. Observation and attention low. Abilities defect: General?. Not Diagnostic. Abilities defect: General?. Not Diagnostic. Definition and memory low. Observation low. Committee Dropped from College. Not Diagnostic.
? H n a & S g ? a 3 fiq < 02 O M 154 2M 155 M 156 M 157 M 158 a o s w p U CO Low Low Low Low Low Spans bO Q 10 02 30 30 30 30 30 Remarks Committee Dropped from College. Not Diagnostic. Committee Dropped from College. Not Diagnostic. Committee Dropped from College. Not Diagnostic. Committee Dropped from College. Not Diagnostic. Attention and memory low. High Digit Span Cases ? w ? | I ? <? ^ ^ CQ M 159 3_ F 160 4M 161 4 M 162 3 M 163 3 M 164 4 M 165 3 M 166 4M 167 2 M 168 3169 33 4 444 ? 3 33 3o g s g O c_, O High High High High High High High Medium Low Low Low Spans 35 35 30 35 30 30 30 30 30 35 30 Remarks Abilities defect: Attention and observation. Trainability defect. Languagability low. Attention low. Left college. Definition low. Abilities defect: Observation, attention, and memory. Abilities defects: General . Not Diagnostic. Observation and attention defects. Not Diagnostic.
As in the group study we again find far greater ratios of accuracy for certain types of spans. In the case of psychology grades and college grades alike, the syllable span and the ideas span stand far above the digit span and the three-letter word span. This accuracy is most pronounced in the low span cases. The relative diagnostic value of the spans for college levels is roughly from highest to lowest: syllable span, ideas span, digit span and three-letter word span. It is apparent that some variance may be found when we are considering different types of memory span scores in relation to mental organization, though the memory span may on the whole be considered diagnostic of mental complexity.
IS THE MEMORY SPAN CONSTANT IN THE USE OF MENTAL COMPLEXITY IN THE INDIVIDUAL? This question suggested by the variant factors already noted is answered by an introspective study of the memory span process. The following study was made by fourteen individuals with the staff of the Psychology Department and Graduate School at Clark University. INTROSPECTIVE STUDY OF THE MEMORY SPAN Directions: I am going to present to you several series of digits of varying length, each preceded by a “ready” signal. During the presentation you will listen merely to the digits as read. Immediately after the presentation you will verbally reproduce the series or as much of the series as possible. Immediately following your reproduction of the series you will give an introspective account of the content of consciousness from the “ready” signal to the end of your reproduction.
First Trial Second Trial Series 5316 4715 69517382 58149372 Time between the first and second trials: 3 days. Results Key: A ?Auditory Imagery. V ?Visual Imagery. Vm ?Voci-motor Imagery. The order of mention, importance and combination is given preference, when the letters are separated by a dash the imagery was stated as separated; when no dash appears it was mentioned as combined. SOME MEMORY SPAN TEST PROBLEMS 247 “Til nt e. w?r<^s Quoted are condensed from the report, but are the words the individual himself. Four Digits Eight Digits Case No. 1 A-V ” ? First Trial . tion.”mPly mitiated the rePr?duc- A-V “tried to say it fast, lest I should forget before I was done.” A-V “i Second Trial the vrT nUT?k0r mmediately set off AV-Vm “Immediately I began the cimo or reproduction.” reproduction. The V of the last four numbers was very obscure by now, but it revived as I was saying them off.” No. 2 V.ym First Trial V-A-Vm “rather confused combinations,” “unpleasantness.” y a . Second Trial breathj! Sc,^ema^-” “inhibition of V-A “blurred and confused.” “ing” crease in intensity and extensity of organics, great unpleasantness.” No. 3 V-ym First Trial V-Vm “unpleasant feeling.” V-Vm <if y Second Trial reeling of certainty.” V-A-Vm “distinct organics.” No. 4 Vm.y ? . First Trial easier than copying them.” A “not time to repeat each to myself.” “seem to come in proper order, I hardly knowing it was right order until I heard my own voice.” it Second Trial general attentive bodily set.” Vm-V-A “first three numbers I was very sure of?and last two?the middle ones were less certain.” No. 5 A-Vm ii . First Teial uccessive A images.” A-Vm “grouped first four, first four and next two, then first four and next two and last two digits.” “practically no kinaesthetics.” 248 THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC Second Trial Vm-A “expectancy.” “slight electric Vm-A “little tension of expectancy? currents?palms of hands and but much greater expectancy of wrists.” effort.” “kinaesthetics?eyebrows, forehead, ears and scalp.” “kinaesthetic movements in blood vessels in neck very distinct.” “grouped as in first trial.” No. 6 First Trial V “distraction?what to expect?how V “difficult to visualize all the to write introspection.” “specula- numbers.” “affective attitude? tive attitude until digits begin.” due to lectures on introspection.” Second Trial V-Vm “feeling of sureness.” V-Vm-A “kinaesthetic feeling of crouched attention (muscularly alert).” No. 7 First Trial A “muscular relaxation.” “no ten- A-Vm “mixed up at end of first sion.” “listened passively and five digits?got last three passively repeated automatically.” ?letting them sink in.” Second Trial Vm “no organics.” “relaxation of Vm “strong tension in fingers, tension.” “nothing in conscious- “eyes tightly closed.” “straining ness but numbers?till repeating of ears.” Hopelessly confused? them in same tempo.” trying to repeat entire series each time new number given.” “Consciousness of thought: ‘if only I had grouped them.’ ” No. 8 First Trial Vm “tension of mind.” “absorbed in Vm “introspection.” “grouped introspection.” hastily.” “doubtful of accuracySecond Trial Vm “mental tension and expect- Vm “More distraction (sources unancy.” “repeat and group.” . known).” “attention on getting rid of series before they were lost. No. 9 First Trial V-Vm “general kinaesthetics?vis- A-V-Vm “grouping,” “kinaesthetics cera, ears, neck.” “V images in viscera?stomach and esopha danced before eyes.” “eyes open? gus, warm waves upward.” unaware of surroundings.” Second Trial V-Vm “kinaesthetics (as before).” A-Vm-V “kinaesthetics (as before) “visual schemati?yellow spots plus swaying of body.” “rhythmwith black periphery.” “grouped.” SOME MEMORY SPAN TEST PROBLEMS 249 No. 10 Vm “f ? ? First Trial io” ,ensjon”t^htening of system? Vm-A “kinaesthetics?quivering.” “th 8 + w*gg^e rapidly.” “visual blankness.” “Vm expertnroat kinaesthetics.” “repro- ience?’I’ve done this before.’ ” c ion simply a repetition of the “frantic repetition.” “internal Vm experience.” speech series.” Vm “f ? Second Trial “nn ore~Per^?d kinaesthetics.” Vm “fore-period (as before) with dull ers snatched into Vm field.” pressure between the eyes.” “kini(f,*31, repetitions.” “organics.” aesthetics?more active.” “orro mgs. ganics?general and breathing.” “throat center or rapid repetitions.” No. 11 A-V-V ” ? First Trial f ” auditory preceptions satis- A-V-Vm “kinaesthetics and organics t[mg- focal striving of prepara- ?unpleasant but indescribable.” ?n. organic and kinaesthetics “forced types of images by repetiague).” tion and reproduction.” “visual schemati.” v u Second Trial m very confused.” “fear of A-V-Vm “(as above) head bent forls raction.” ward.” “perception seemed satisfactory.” “assurance that correct.” No. 12 y ? . First Trial ? n^rrowing of field of attention.” Vm “kinaesthetics in chest?strain.” s ram. “sureness and adequate- “confusion?unable to put in GSS ?f response.” order.” “feeling of inadequateness of representation.” ym f Second Trial Kinaesthetics?chest; pressure Vm “body set?kinaesthetics (as 111 stomach.” “reproduction quick before).” “after first four numbers, sure-” recall them in memory and continue listening.” “repeated quickly for fear of losing them or order.” “sureness but not absolute confidence.” No. 13 Vm ” First Trial repeated after examiner and Vm “passively fix each number in uscular contraction in throat and mind.” “not conscious of movea? head.” ment until brought to light in introspection.” ^ u Second Trial eemed to simply comprehend it.” Vm-A “attempted to take passively ense feeling of strain.” ?easier.” “movement of rapid review.” 250 THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC No. 14 First Trial (?) “muscles set?not strain.” (A) A “strained attitude at first.” “feeling of tenseness.” “fear-not “relaxation to tenseness.” “feeling being able to remember.” “not of obscurity; assisted by a rhythcomprehending.” mic feeling.” Second Trial (?) “relaxation.” “feeling of surprise A “feeling of anxiety.” “saying over at (A) not being more digits.” mentally.” “no special tenseness of muscles.” “doubtful whether one can give auditory attention without something of muscular tension particularly in neck muscles.” “slight inhibition of breathing.”
TREATMENT OF RESULT I Types of Imagery Used Number of times Four digits Eight digits A ….. 4 3 V 2 1 Vm 8 7 A-V 2 2 A-Vm 2 5 V-Vm 8 1 A-V-Vm 2 9 II Variations in Types op Imagery Used From Four to Eight Series No. of Times No. of Cases Vm added 3 3 A added 9 6 A-V-Vm emphasis changed 1 1 Vm emphasis same 4 2 A emphasis same 2 1 A-V-Vm emphasis same 2 1 III Variations in Concomitants From Four to Eight Series No. of Times No. of Cases Uncertainty, Obscurity, etc 15 8 Unpleasantness 4 3 Organics 3 3 Kinesthetics 13 8 “Affective attitude” 1 1 Grouped 5 3 Rhythm 2 2 1
tvD’ff^C?m^eX^y ^magery *s found in 10 of the 14 cases, usually Co 1 6 ^ the addition of auditory imagery; a complexity of some 0f comitant is found in all 14 cases, usually typified by the addition the Uncer^nty> obscurity and kinesthetics. Peculiarly enough tyj1-jV0^m?^or _imagery usually calls for kinaesthetics and organics, j, .e auditory imagery usually calls for greater uncertainty, differ ,1&. c^ear that the spans of varying length call for entirely const611f ? ac^^roun(^s mental complexity, that the same span is not the an m US6 men^ complexity of the individual, that diffe ar?6- S^an ^oes no^ ca^ ^or the same mental complexity in con<J6n+ .lnc^^v^ua^s? an^ that therefore the memory span is not ant m any way in its use of the mental complexity.
SUMMARY OF EXPERIMENTS AND CONCLUSIONS evid ^ diagnostic value of the memory span test is readily extr-6110 *n manner in which it clearly differentiates the two ^ne groups, the upper and the lower. toent 1 mem?ry span test is diagnostic of the complexity of encies ?rganization ^aken as a bodily factor including the competesWith which the individual makes for successful performance. e Memory span test is of little value except it be used by ^ten?3111”101’ W^? ^aS concisely arranged the stimulus with the itself 10^ removinS all the inherent “dangers” from the span anrp/rom manner of its presentation. comnl f mem?ry span score is not sufficient in itself; it requires a ail(j 6 e analysis of the complexity of the mental processes involved, assurance of the directness of the response. Use b v, . memory sPan has a certain restriction placed upon its clearj”^ ^ntellectual level of the individual being tested. This is 0f y n?ted in the varying diagnostic values of the different types relaf0IriOly sPan- Further research in this field should reveal the a? 1Ve. Agnostic use of the different types of memory span tests arymg intellectual and age levels.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
(2) ^ A First Book in Psychology. New York: Macmillan Co. 1912. ^ ttpstone, H. J. Some Aspects of the Memory Span Test, A Study in pi,S]C^, Experimental Studies in Psychology and Pedagogy No. 7. (3) |ju 1 a e’Phia Psychological Clinic Press. 1917. K7Srtone, J- Memory Span Tests. The Psychological Clinic. Vol. XII, ?s- -9, May 15, 1919. The Psychological Clinic Press., Philadelphia. * A matpw.i c0[“I’’ete historical and experimental bibliography will be found of to date in Humpstone, H. J. (2). 252 THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC (4) Kirkpatrick, E. A. Fundamentals of Child Psychology. New York: Macmillan Co. 1912. (5) Miller, Karl G. The Competency of Fifty College Students. A Diagnostic Study. Experimental Studies in Psychology and Pedagogy, No. 8, Philadelphia. Psychological Clinic Press, Philadelphia. (6) Travis, A. Reproduction of Short Prose Passages: A Study of Two Binet Tests. Psychological Clinic. Vol. IX, No. 7, December 15, 1915. Psychological Clinic Press, Philadelphia. COMPLETE SET OF TABLES FOR MEMORY SPAN TEST PROBLEMS?AN ANALYTICAL STUDY Distribution of Memory Span for Digits Forward Measure No. of Cases Percentage 4 3 .2 5 37 2.9 6 113 8.9 7 237 18.7 8 292 23.1 9 272 21.5 10 162 12.8 11 92 7.3 12 55 4.3 Total: 1263 Table II Distribution of Memory Span for Three-Letter Words Measure No. of Cases Percentage 3 16 1.3 4 82 7.1 5 372 32.3 6 275 23.9 7 274 23.8 8 131 11.4 Total: 1150 Table III Distribution of Memory Span for Syllables Measure No. of Cases Percentage 10 3 .33 20 44 4.8 25 104 11.4 30 584 64.5 35 140 15.4 40 21 2.3 45 50 9 .9 Total: 905 SOME MEMORY SPAN TEST PROBLEMS 253 Table IV Distribution of Memory Span for Ideas Measure No. of Cases Percentage 0 12 1.4 1 49 6.02 2 97 11.09 3 85 10.4 4 122 15.02 5 118 14.5 6 118 14.5 7 87 10.7 8 60 7.4 9 29 3.5 10 23 2.8 11 10 12 12 2 -24 Total: 812 Table V Distributions of Memory Span Tests for Digits a H H cj I Cj Oh g > ^ W a u J % o < > o g | I “3 !-? 12 r2 a .2 -g > .? 5 .5P & *3 “2 S 6 * ^ ~ ? 13 1 12 8 21 1 2 11 16 26 5 7 10 32 37 22 73 6 9 64 60 61 89 37 71 47 91 53 69 7 62 29 55 33 48 6 29 16 20 2 48 5 5 1 6 19 4 0 0 0 0 3 ooooo Significant Results: Maximum 12 12 12 13 10 Median 8 9 8 9 8 Mode g 9 8 9 8 Mean ‘ g.18 8.9 8.07 8.8 7.39 Minimum 5 5 5 5 4 254 THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC Table VI Original Group Test for Memory Span for Digits Forward and Repetition Group Test Compared Repetition Group Test Scores The Original Group Test Scores Table VII Original Group Test for Memory Span for Digits Forward and Individual Visual-Vocal Test Compared Individual VisuaL-Vocal Test Scores Original Group Test Scores SOME MEMORY SPAN TEST PROBLEMS 255 Table VIII Original Group Test for Memory Span for Digits Forward and Individual Vocal-Auditory Test Compared Individual Vocal-Auditory Test Scores Original Group Test Scores Table IX Original Group Test for Memory Span for Digits Forward Group Test for Digits Backward Compared Group Test Backward Scores 5 6 7 8 9 Original Group Test Scores 256 THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC Table X Comparison of Original Group Test for Digits and Repetition Individual A-V Individual V-V Backward + + av. + + 2.5 2. +2. 1.4 1.16 +1.16 2.0 2.0 +2.0 1.7 1.4 +1.4 2.1 1.36 +1.36 1.0 1.95 1.6 +1.32 2.0 1.9 +1.9 1.4 1.8 1.09 +.47 1.0 2.08 1.44 +1.3 1.0 1.3 .78 +.57 2.0 1.8 1.66 +1.59 1.1 1.12 .76 -.07 1.0 1.9 1.32 +1.1 1.33 1.04 .68 +1.6 1.0 1.26 1.19 +1.0 1.61 1.27 1.09 -.55 1.5 1.76 1.13 +.55 1.5 1.3 .94 -.49 .64 1.28 .63 +.31 1.73 2.0 1.43 -1.25 10 1.6 1.5 1.22 -.55 2.08 1.0 1.66 -1.5 1.31 1.0 .73 -.66 1.95 1.91 -1.91 11 1.75 1.0 .76 -.30 2.41 2.41 -2.0 1.81 1.0 1.5 -1.25 2.78 2.78 -2.78 12 2.5 1.25 ?2,5 3.28 2.87 -2.87 2.75 2.75 -2.75 3.83 3.83 -3.83 Total 1.51 1.97 1.32 +.72 1.82 1.27 1.09 -.16 1.58 1.72 1.32 +.64 1.85 1.37 1.35 -.88 ? : Minus Variation. av : Average Variation. + : Plus Variation. V : Average Difference. SOME MEMORY Table XI SPAN TEST PROBLEMS 257 IABLjU ^v.x Variation Between the Individual Tests for Digits Vocal-Auditory and Visual-Vocal Average Variation 1.2 Average Gain .76 Visual over Auditory 3 -2-10 +1 +2 +3 +4 30 67 85 61 13 7 3 11 Table XII Low Memory Span Comparison 0/ Per Cent BeferaUe to ^ Digits Three-Letter y Defect in: b Word 48 27 n 56.25 29.72 ^ 41.38 Observation 5Q l6.21 28 Distribution of Attention Q.2l 4138 Description 56.25 ^ 33.33 ^ Difference and Likeness l6 21 ?? 41 38 Definition if 21.62 33.33 ^ 31 5 43.24 41.38 ? 5 40.54 J’ 37.93 Memory 5?’25 37.85 33 33 A.RITHMETRIC PROFICIENCY Table XIII High Memory Span Chanson of Per Cent Ue3 Ideas Digits Three-Letter y Abilities in: 6 Word 50. 75 78 79 Is’46 83.34 Observation 6g 75 69.70 * . g6 6? Distribution of Attention 9l ‘ ? g3 g4 Description ” 87.88 9 ? g3 34 Difference and Likeness ? 75 60.61 83.34 Definition nft 90.91 ‘ QO 50 ?pp”?teS 93.75 81.82 66;67 . 57.58 rC fifi 67 Memory ^ 78.79 54.55 66.67 Arithmetric Proficiency 258 THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC Table XIV Memory Span Scores Referable to Psychology Grades Memory Span Psychology Grades High 3.5 Low Ratio Digits High 64% 36% 2 to 1 Low 19% 81% 4 to 1 Three-Letter Words High 61% 39% 2 to 1 Low 33% 67% 2 to 1 Syllables High 53% 47% 1 to 1 Low 15% 85% 4 to 1 Ideas High 62% 38% 2 to 1 Low 7% 93% 13 to 1 Table XV Memory Span Scores Referable to College Grades Memory Span College Grades Ratio High 3.5 Low Digits High 78% 22% 4 to 1 Low 42% 58% 1 to 1 Three-Letter Words High 85% 15% 4 to 1 Low 56% 44% 1 to 1 Syllables High 90% 10% 9 to 1 Low 25% 75% 3 to 1 Ideas High 87% 13% 9 to 1 Low 42% 58% 1 to 1
Disclaimer
The historical material in this project falls into one of three categories for clearances and permissions:
Material currently under copyright, made available with a Creative Commons license chosen by the publisher.
Material that is in the public domain
Material identified by the Welcome Trust as an Orphan Work, made available with a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
While we are in the process of adding metadata to the articles, please check the article at its original source for specific copyrights.