The role of anxiety in serial rote learning

Citation preview

THE ROLE OF AJttXBCT IN SERIAL ROTE LBARSBTQ

by E rn e st Kimball Montague

A d i s s e r t a t i o n subm itted in p a r t i a l f u lf illm e n t of th© req uirem ents f o r th e degree or D octor of P h ilo s ­ ophy, in the Department^of Psychology, in the Graduate College of the S ta te Thai v a r s ity o f Iowa August, 1950

ProQuest Number: 10598597

All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality o f this reproduction is d e p e n d e n t upon th e quality o f th e c o p y subm itted. In th e unlikely e v e n t that th e author did not sen d a c o m p le te manuscript an d there are missing p a g e s, th e se will b e n oted . Also, if material had to b e rem oved , a n o te will indicate th e deletion.

uest. ProQuest 10598597 Published by ProQuest LLC (2017). Copyright o f th e Dissertation is held by th e Author. All rights reserved. This work is p ro tected against unauthorized cop yin g under Title 17, United States C o d e Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 - 1346

TV " .o o .

ACIOTQYfoSBGKSHT

The au th o r w ishes to express h is s in c e re g r a titu d e to to* I . $* F a r te r , whose s tim u la tin g and i n s i g h tf u l guidance was a moat im portant f a c to r in the

P h M < i_ S

com pletion o f t h i s study*

ii

n i l op m m m s B Page In tro d u c tio n statem en t o f the problem

.................

1

• , . .

11 16

te p e rim e n ta l Procedure • * * • • • • •

16

S u b jects A pparatus and Method FrocedurQ and D esign B e su lts

, .

.................

17

* # • « . «

19

..................... ........................

20

Comparison of Perform ance Measures under Three C onditions •

20

S e r ia l P o s itio n Measures

* * * «

30

D iscu ssio n .......................................................

37

Summary

48

* » < • * * « » . » • * • « •

D eferences » * * , * . « Appendix A • « « • • •

.......................... • ..........

Appendix B

51

«

53

*

55

Appendix C . • * « ..................

58

Appandlx D

60

...................... * •

ill

tab m

m w xm m B

fig u r e 1

Fag© A diagram in d ic a tin g ©hang©© exp©©tad In h y p o th e tic a l perform ance m easures t e r anxious and nonanxious s u b je c ts as a fu n c tio n of th e r e la ti v e s tre n g th o f c o rre c t ten d en cies a s compared w ith In c o rre c t te n d en c ie s i n a le a rn in g s i t u a t io n « * * * • , * » • » * * • » »

13

2

Perform ance curves

f o r C ondition 1

. .

22

3

Perform ance curves

fo r C ondition XI * •

23

4

Perform ance curve®

fo r C ondition XII

23

3

Mean number of c o rre c t a n tic ip a tio n s p e r t r i a l f o r anxious and nonanxious s u b je c ts under each c o n d itio n , th e m m sco re In c lu d in g t r i a l s 6-25 fo r each co n d itio n « » « , » * • * » * , »

27

Mean number o f c o rre c t a n tic ip a tio n s p er t r i a l f o r anxious a n d , nonanxious s u b je c ts under each c o n d itio n , the mean score in c lu d in g t r i a l s 26-*45 fo r C ondition I and t r i a l s 6-25 fo r C onditions XI and XXI

27

6

«

7

Mean number o f c o rre c t a n tic ip a tio n s p er t r i a l f o r anxious and nonanxious s u b je c ts under each c o n d itio n , th e mean score in c lu d in g f iv e t r i a l s a t th e m iddle o f le a rn in g ( s i x out o f tw elve c o rre c t a n tic ip a tio n s ) f o r th e nonanxious group and the same blocks of t r i a l s f o r the anxious groups ......................................... 32

5

S e r ia l p o s itio n curves f o r anxious and nonanxious groups under a l l conditions*

lv

34

T A B IiB01 C A B L E S T able I

II

III

XT

V

TX

T il

T ill

XX

Page Mean number of c o r r e c t response© p e r t r i a l * over blocks o f tw enty t r i a l s t f o r anxious and nonanxious s u b je c ts u n d er th re e c o n d itio n s * » • * # » , * *

25

Mean number o f c o r r e c t re sp o n se s p e r t r i a l f o r f iv e t r l A l s a t M idpoint o f le a r n in g

31

D iffe re n c e between means of number o f e r r o r s a t p o s itio n s 1 jad 2 and position© 7 and 8 on th e s e r i a l p o s itio n curve f o r each group

35

A n aly sis of V ariance u sin g mean sco re o f an x io u s and nonancious groups f o r t r i a l s 6-25 in each c o n d i t i o n ..................... . » *

61

A n aly sis o f V ariance u sin g mean sc o re of anxious and nonanxious groups f o r t r i a l s 6-25 i n C o n d itio n s X and XX * ................ A n aly sis o f V ariance u sin g mean ©core of an x io u s and nonanxious groups f o r t r i a l s 6-25 i n C o n ditions 1 and H I ................... .. A n aly sis o f V ariance u sin g mean sc o re o f anxious and nonanxious groups f o r tr ia l© 6-25 in C o nditions XX and X I I ................

61

61

62

A n aly sis o f V ariance u sin g mean sco re of anxious and nonanxious groups f o r t r i a l s 26-45 i n C o n d itio n I and t r i a l s 6-25 in C o n d itio n s I I and XIX..................« . . . *

62

A n aly sis o f V ariance u sin g mean sco re o f anxious and nonanxious groups f o r block o f f iv e t r i a l s a t m id le a rn in g * » » •*

62

v

1

Chapter I iim m voT iQ M C lin ic a lly , a n x ie ty i s u s u a lly thought o f i n two d i f f e r e n t ways:

as a h y p o th esised s t a t e , n o t d i r e c t l y

o b serv a b le, th e re d u c tio n of which i s r e la te d to the appearance and m aintenance of n e u r o tic symptoms, and a s d i r e c tl y o b serv ab le b eh a v io r, d e fin e d in term s o f c e r ta in o v ert re sp o n se s, p h y s io lo g ic a l s ig n s , and re p o rte d f e e lin g s o f th e p a tie n t* Hecent exp erim ental re s e a rc h has r e s u lte d in a c o n s tru c t o f a n x ie ty , or f e a r , c lo s e ly r e la te d to th e f i r s t o f the two concepts p re se n ted above*

A number of

in v e s tig a to r s (1, 3 , 11, 13 ) have conceived of a n x ie ty in the la b o ra to ry anim al as a n o l~ d ira c tly -o b s e rv a b le , a c q u ire d , a n tic ip a to r y response to p a in ; t h a t i s , as a c o n s tru c t d efin ed in term s of an teced en t and p re s e n t stim u lu s co n d itio n s*

F ear or a n x ie ty , so d e fin e d , i s

assumed to have a t l e a s t two o f th e fu n c tio n a l p r o p e r tie s of prim ary d r iv e s ; i t s re d u c tio n should be r e in f o r c in g (i* e * t i t should stre n g th e n resp o n ses im m ediately p reced in g i t s re d u c tio n ) and i t should in te n s if y any response ten d en c ie s th a t a re p re s e n t d u rin g i t s p erio d o f evocation* The in v e s tig a to r s c ite d above have been concerned

2 p rim a rily w ith th e r e in f o r c in g p r o p e r tie s o f f e a r and hair© dem onstrated t h a t c e r ta in k in d s o f behavior In la b o ra to ry anim als may be p re d ic te d and ex p lain ed on t h i s b a s i s , !#©«, on th e assum ption t h a t f e a r a c ts as d riv e i n accordance w ith th e Hull-Spenc© (8 ,14) fo rm u la tio n o f th e r o le s o f d riv e and d riv e -re d u c tio n i n le a r n in g . W ithin t h i s framework* th e s tre n g th o f response te n d e n c ie s i s conceived to be a m u ltip lic a tiv e fu n c tio n o f t h e i r h a b it- s tr e n g th s and th e g e n e ra l d r iv e - le v e l o f th e responding organism*

C onsidering now th e second

(m u ltip lic a tiv e ) p ro p e rty mentioned above, i t fo llo w s t h a t fe a r sh o u ld , i f I t act® a s d rive* a f f e c t response s tre n g th by in te n s if y in g o r augmenting response te n d en c ie s in a given s itu a tio n * T ay lo r (15) has found evidence f o r t h i s m o tiv a tio n a l o r augmenting r o le o f a n x ie ty i n an eyeb lin k co n d itio n in g experim ent w ith human su b je c ts* D efin in g a n x ie ty in term s o f s c o re s on a q u e stio n n a ire designed to measure symptomatic o r m a n ife st a n x ie ty , she found s i g n i f i c a n t l y f a s t e r co n d itio n in g in subject® w ith hig h a n x ie ty sco res than in th o se w ith low a n x ie ty scores* While Taylor*a s u b je c ts were s e le c te d on th e b a s is o f b e h a v io ra lly -d e fin s d a n x ie ty , h er p r e d ic tio n and e x p la n a tio n o f t h e i r c o n d itio n in g performance was baaed on th®

3

assum ption th a t m a n ife st a n x ie ty p e rm its th e in fe re n c e o f a h y p o th e tic a l d riv e s t a t e which a c ts to in c re a s e resp o n se ten d en c ie s*

F u rth e r p o s itiv e evidence concerning

th e m o tiv a tio n a l p r o p e r tie s o f m a n ife st a n x ie ty in d e te r ­ m ining th e perform ance o f human s u b je c ts comes from th e s tu d ie s o f Welch and KSubis {16, 17) and Bosenbaum (13)* These s tu d ie s give e m p iric a l evidence of h eig h ten ed re sp o n se te n d e n c ie s i n th e p resen ce of a n x ie ty , b e h a v io ra lly d e fin e d , and th u s su p p o rt th e n o tio n th a t a n x ie ty a c ts a s d riv e* L i t t l e ex p erim ental work has been don© in d e fin in g th e r e la tio n s h ip between a n x ie ty and v e rb a l le a r n in g , alth o u g h c l i n i c a l o b se rv a tio n (2 , p# 249} 3 , p* 159) ten d s to in d ic a te th a t th e le a rn in g and r e te n tio n o f v e rb a l m a te ria ls may b© p o o re r in th e a n x ie ty s ta te * Montagu© and S ch n eid er, i n an unpublished stu d y , used tw enty s u b je c ts from each o f T a y lo r1s c o n d itio n in g groups and found slow er rot© s e r i a l le a rn in g of nonsense s y lla b le s f o r th e anxious s u b je c ts than f o r th e non-anxious su b je c ts# Malmo and Amsel ( 9 ) , u sin g p a t ie n ts who p re se n te d severe a n x ie ty symptoms, found slow er s e r i a l le a r n in g fo r t h i s group th a n f o r t h e i r non-anxious co n tro ls*

Although such

r e s u l t s as th e s e m ight s u p e r f ic i a lly appear to be in c o n s is te n t w ith th o se o b tained by T a y lo r, c e r ta in c o n s id e ra tio n s r e l a t i n g to th® concept o f d riv e in d ic a te

4 t h a t th e e f f e c t o f a n x ie ty on perform ance may be expected to vary w ith th e n a tu re o f th e ta s k involved* U r s t , one must co n sid er th e p resen ce o f resp o n se ten d en cies a s s o c ia te d w ith th e d riv e rstim n lu s*

W ithin

th e l u l l i a n framework, every d riv e i s assumed to be a s s o c ia te d w ith a d r lv e - B tlm lu s to which v a rio u s resp o n ses may be connected w ith v ary in g d eg rees o f h a b it stre n g th *

I n a d efen se c o n d itio n in g s i t u a t i o n . I t may

be assumed t h a t re sp o n se s to th e d r iv e - s tim u li p re se n t a t a high le v e l o f a n x ie ty a a?© seldom incom patible w ith the resp o n se being learn ed and, in f a c t , m y f a c i l i t a t e I t s a c q u is itio n .

In th e v e rb a l le a rn in g s i t u a t i o n , however,

th e response ten d en c ie s e l i c i t e d by th e a n x ie ty -s tim u li may be much le s s com patible w ith th o se re q u ire d f o r su c c e ssfu l perform ance and, i n t h i s way, m ight r e ta r d learn in g *

This

f a c to r i s m entioned as a p o s s ib le e x p la n a tio n o f the d e le ­ te r io u s e f f e c t o f in c re a se d d riv e upon v e rb a l le a rn in g a s compared w ith co n d itio n in g s more g e n e ra lly I t in d ic a te s t h a t th e e f f e c t o f a n x ie ty upon perform ance may vary c o n sid e ra b ly , depending upon th e e x te n t to which resp o n ses to a n x ie ty -s tim u li f a c i l i t a t e o r i n h i b i t th e resp o n ses to be le a rn e d i n a given s itu a tio n * A second f a c to r to be considered i s th e r e l a t i v e s tre n g th o f c o r re c t response® a s compared w ith t h a t o f

5 in c o r r e c t resp o n ses i n th e le a rn in g s itu a tio n *

Here

we a re concerned n o t w ith re sp o n se s to th e d riv e s tim u li a s s o c ia te d w ith h ig h a n x ie ty l e v e l , but w ith th e resp o n ses which a re considered a fu n c tio n o f th e ta s k involved* H ull i 7 ) has shown how sim ple tr ia l* a M * e r r o r le a rn in g may be delayed i f wrong resp o n ses i n i t i a l l y p o s s e s s g re a te r h a b it s tre n g th th an c o r r e c t responses#

Ifc such s i t u a t i o n s ,

added d riv e m y in c re a s e te n d e n c ie s to continue making u n su cc essfu l responses} i# e * , th e g r e a te r th e valu e of th e d riv e m u ltip ly in g such i n i t i a l in c o r r e c t response te n d e n c ie s , th e lo n g e r they should p e r s i s t and th u s r e ta r d learn in g #

V erbal le a rn in g ta s k s o fte n re p re s e n t a c tu a tio n s

o f t h i s s o r t , w ith s e v e ra l S~E connections to be learn ed and w ith a preponderance o f wrong resp o n ses ( im p lic it or e x p l i c i t ) m arking th e e a r ly p a r t o f th e le a rn in g task# Tender th e assum ptions m entioned, i t seems re a so n a b le to p r e d ic t t h a t a t l e a s t th e e a r ly p a r t o f many v e rb a l le a rn in g ta s k s should r e f l e c t p o o re r perform ance fo r anxious su b je c ts# I f t h i s second f a c t o r i s s i g n i f i c a n t , v ary in g th e number and s tre n g th o f p o s s ib le e r r o r te n d en c ie s in a ta s k m ight be expected to a f f e c t anxious and non* anxious s u b je c ts d i f f e r e n ti a l ly *

There a re a t l e a s t two

r e la te d ways o f m an ip u latin g the tendency to make c o r r e c t

6 ( o r In c o rre o t) resp o n ses i n a r o te s e r i a l le a rn in g s itu a tio n .

These r e l a t e to th e degree of form a! o r

m eaningful s i m il a r it y in th e H a t and to the degree o f a s s o c ia tio n value o r m a n in g fu ln e s s of th e item s as c o n v e n tio n ally determ ined , ©*g*» by H ull (6 ) o r Glaze (4 )♦ G en erally sp eak in g , th e l e s s d i s t i n c t i v e o r d if f e r e n t ia b l e th e item s o f a v erb a! H a t* w hether in term s o f form al o r m eaningful s i m il a r it y o r o f a s s o c ia tiv e value* th e p o o rer th e performance#

U g h form al s i m i l a r i t y (d e fin ed

i n term s o f id e n tif y o f l e t t e r s ) may be assumed to r e s u l t in a la rg e number o f e r r o r s due to g e n e ra liz a tio n fa c to rs * I f a response term? i s connected to a stim ulus t e r n w ith a p a r t i c u l a r degree o f h a b it s tr e n g th , i t i s reaso n ab le to suppose th a t s e v e ra l s im ila r stim u lu s te r n s w i l l be connected to th e same response item w ith h a b it s tre n g th s roughly p ro p o rtio n a l to the degree o f s i m ila r it y between th e g e n e ra lise d s tim u li and th e a p p ro p ria te stim ulus term* These g e n e ra liz e d s tim u li w i l l te n d to evoke th e response w ith a frequency p ro p o rtio n a l to th e amount of g e n e ra liz e d h a b it s tre n g th they p o sse ss.

In th e same manner* i t may be

supposed t h a t a given stim ulus term i s connected w ith a number o f re s p o n s e s , some o f them o f an e x t r a - l i s t s o r t , th a t a re h ig h ly s im ila r to the c o r re c t re sp o n se .

A gain, th e

o b tained frequency o f th e se responses should be roughly

7 p r o p o rtio n a l to t h e i r degree o f s i m il a r it y w ith th e c o r re c t response* !^i© f a c to r o f a s s o c ia tiv e s tr e n g th a ls o d e te r ­ m ines th e e x te n t to which c o r re c t or In c o rre c t resp o n ses a re l i k e l y to occur*

Item s of high a s s o c ia tio n v alu e may

be s a id to c a r ry le a rn e d resp o n ses o f a d i s t i n c t i v e and m eaningful n a tu re * p o sse ssin g a high degree o f h a b it stre n g th *

I n c o rre c t response te n d e n c ie s due to g e n e r a li­

s a tio n are l i k e l y to be reduced i n s tr e n g th and frequency a s a d i r e c t fu n c tio n o f th e degree o f d is tin c tiv e n e s s Of meaning o f th e se item s*

Secondly, w ith m eaningful item s,

a s s o c ia tio n s between item© i n a rot© s e r i a l ta.sk a re r e a d ily accom plished5 @«g», i t i s e a s ie r to in c o rp o ra te such item s i n t o mnemonic device® such a s sen ten c es than i s th e case w ith item s o f low a s s o c ia tio n value* More s p e c i f i c a l l y 1 given a s e r i a l le a rn in g ta s k In v o lv in g nonsense s y lla b le s h ig h in form al s i m i l a r i t y and low in m eaningfulness («ug** TQZ.$. M S , Z IF )t on© may e x p e c t, e a r ly in p r a c t i c e , both low e x c ita to r y te n d e n c ie s to th e c o r r e c t response® and th e presence o f a la rg e number of in c o r r e c t e x c ita to ry tendencies*

Sine® th e

c o rre c t te n d e n c ie s a re weak, th e r e 1b th® obvious p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t o th e r responses ( e x t r a - l i s t re sp o n se s, e i t h e r o v e rt or i m p l i c i t / , v e rb a l or nonverbal) may

8 predom inate i n stre n g th *

In t h i s ease we may expect t h a t

an in c re a s e in d r iv e , s in c e i t in e re a s e e th e abeoXut© d ifferen c© between th e s tre n g th s o f th© s tr o n g e r and weaker re sp o n s e s , w i l l r e ta r d perform ance. However, even in th e ease in which a c o r re c t resp o n se tendency I s s tro n g e r than any o th e r s in g le tendency, th e re m y be an in c re a s e in e r r o r s a s s o c ia te d w ith an in c re a s e in d riv e*

Although th e a b s o lu te d iffe re n c e s

between th© s tr e n g th s o f c o r re c t and in c o r r e c t te n d e n c ie s a re a d i r e c t fu n c tio n o f d riv e l e v e l , m n y more o f the wrong te n d e n c ie s w i l l be supra thresh© Id under h ig h d riv e le v e l co n d itio n s*

Sine© th e momentary s tr e n g th s o f both

in c o r r e c t and c o r r e c t te n d e n c ie s may be assumed to f lu c tu a te a synchronously i n accordance w ith th e o s c i l l a t i o n p r in c ip le ( 8 , p# 3®#), I n c o r r e c t ten d en c ie s may be expected to compete s u c c e s s fu lly f o r a r e l a t i v e l y la rg e p ro p o rtio n o f th© time#

With lower drive* th e c o r re c t

te n d e n c ie s a re n o t so s tro n g , but many more o f th© in * c o r r e c t te n d e n c ie s m y be expected to be su b th re sh o ld j a s a r e s u l t th e low er d riv e could ©Oxr aivabxy le a d to r e l a t i v e l y b e t t e r performance*

In t h i s way, in c re a se d

d riv e may in c re a s e th e a lre a d y la r g e amount o f i n t r a l i s t In te r fe re n c e in a ta s k such a s th a t being considered and th u s a d v e rse ly a f f e c t performance*

9 I f we now d ecrease i n t r a l i s t s im ila r ity * h olding average a s s o c ia tio n v alue c o n s ta n t, (®*g*, by u sin g s y lla b le s such a s BW, HAJ*, e tc # ) we may expect s u b je c ts a t b o th le v e ls o f d riv e to le a r n more r a p id ly than in th e more d i f f i c u l t ta s k d isc u sse d above*

Since th e re i s

la s s g e n e ra lis a tio n * th e re should be few er competing te n d e n c ie s and t h e i r h a b it s tre n g th should be le s s *

With

g e n e r a lis a tio n le s s and w ith competing te n d e n c ie s f o r both c la s s e s o f s u b je c ts lower in th® h ie ra rc h y o f response* th e re a r e fewer in c o r r e c t te n d en c ie s to b© m u ltip lie d by In c rease d d riv e*

Perform ance on t h i s type o f task* as

compared w ith perform ance on th e f i r s t * should show g r e a te r improvement f o r th® anxious th an f o r th© nonanxious su b je c ts* a s s o c ia tio n value i s in c re a se d {at any given le v e l o f i n t r a l i s t s i m i l a r i t y ) , th e r e s u l t should be f a s t e r le a rn in g under both d riv e co n d itio n s*

Meanings are

a tta c h e d to th e s e s y lla b le s w ith a high degree of h a b it s tre n g th and, as mentioned p rev io u sly * t h i s type of item i s more r e a d ily le a rn e d i n s e rie s *

Since th e e f f e c t o f

added d r iv e i s to In c re a s e the d iffe re n c e i n th e s tre n g th s o f c o r re c t and in c o r r e c t te n d e n c ie s, th e presence of stro n g c o r re c t and weak in c o r r e c t te n d e n c ie s in a ta s k o f t h i s type should r e s u l t in b e tte r perform ance of

anxious *

r e l a t i v e to nonanxious s u b je c ts , than in e i th e r o f th®

10 p re v io u s ty p e s o f task# B rie fly summarised* w© should expect a g r e a te r improvement in th e perform ance o f th e anxious th an in t h a t o f th e nonanxious as we p ro g re ss from a ta s k in v o l­ vin g a h ig h p r o b a b ility o f competing resp o n ses (h ig h I n t r a l i s t s im ila r ity } to one in v o lv in g a lower p r o b a b ility (low s im ila r ity ) *

In c re a s in g th e s tre n g th and p r o b a b ility

o f o ccurrence o f c o rre c t ten d en c ie s by r a is in g the a s s o c ia tio n value should work s t i l l more to the advantage o f th© anxious su b jects# Among th e im p lic a tio n s a r is in g from the p re se n t t h e o r e ti c a l trea tm en t i s th a t concerning the e f f e c t s o f added d riv e on th e s e r i a l p o s itio n curve*

f y p i e a lly t

t h i s curve (o f e r r o r s ) shows i t s g re a te r e le v a tio n a t a p o in t s l i g h t l y p a s t th© center*

On th© assum ption th a t

th e g r e a te r number of e r r o r s i s due to in cre ased i n t r a ­ s e r i a l in te r f e r e n c e a t t h i s p o s itio n , i t follow s t h a t added d riv e should have g re a te r d e trim e n ta l e f f e c t her© th a n a t th© forw ard end o f th e curve, wher© in te rfe re n c e i s presum ably s l i g h t .

B r ie f ly , the d iffe re n c e between

perform ances fo r m iddle item s and item s in the f i r s t p a r t o f th e l i s t should be g re a te r f o r anxious s u b je c ts th an f o r nonanxious su b jects*

I t may be noted th a t t h i s

im p lic a tio n i s somewhat a t v arian ce w ith re s u lts found i n

th© Malmo-Amsel stu d y ( ® ) * These in v e s tig a to r s re p o rte d th e g r e a t e s t d iffe re n c e between anxious and nonanxious s u b je c ts a t th e forward end of th e curve*

A lso , in ­

s p e c tio n o f t h e i r d a ta show© t h a t th e comparison o f perform ance in th e m iddle of th e l i s t w ith t h a t o f th e f i r s t p a r t o f th e l i s t y ie ld s l i t t l e d if f e r e n c e between anxious and nonanxious*

Sine©, however, th e d e f in i t i o n

o f a n x ie ty used In t h e i r r e p o rt i s somewhat d i f f e r e n t from t h a t used In th© p re se n t study* th© two concepts a re n o t n e c e s s a r ily c o n tra d ic to ry * sta te m e n t o f th e Problem The p re se n t stu d y re p re s e n ts an e m p iric a l in v e s tig a tio n o f th e h y p o th esis th a t th© e f f e c t o f in ­ creased a n x ie ty upon ex p erim en tal perform ance I s a fu n c tio n o f th© r e l a t i v e a m b e r and s tr e n g th o f in c o r r e c t resp o n se te n d e n c ie s e l i c i t e d i n a given s itu a tio n *

Sine©

a n x ie ty , d efin e d In term s o f m a n ife st sig n s and symptoms, i s assumed to have d riv e p r o p e r tie s , in creased a n x ie ty should in c re a s e a l l respons© te n d e n c ie s a s s o c ia te d w ith th e s itu a tio n *

furtherm ore* f o r any given in c re a s e In

d r iv e , s tr o n g e r te n d e n c ie s w i l l show r e l a t i v e l y g r e a te r augm entation th an weaker ones*

Thus, In a s i t u a t i o n in

which in c o r r e c t resp o n se ten d en c ie s a re very s tro n g i n com parison w ith c o r r e c t te n d e n c ie s , any in c re a s e in a n x ie ty should augment th e se s tro n g in c o r r e c t te n d e n c ie s and th u s

12 g r e a t ly r e ta r d perforxoance.

An extreme h y p o th e tic a l

s i t u a t i o n o f t h i s s o r t i s represented: a t th e l e f t end o f th e diagram in F ig u re 1 » in d ic a tin g th© r e la ti v e p e r­ formance m easures f o r anxious and nonanxious su b jects# With le s s d iffe re n c e in th e s tre n g th s of c o r re c t and in c o r r e c t ten d encies* b ut w ith th© In c o rre c t s t i l l s tro n g e r th a n th© c o r r e c t, an in c re a s e in a n x ie ty should r e s u l t in an in c re a s e in perform ance measure f o r both c la s s e s o f s u b je c ts , th e m agnitude o f th© in c re a s e being g r e a te r f o r the anxious su b je c ts#

As th© d iffe re n c e in the s tre n g th s

o f c o r re c t and In c o r re c t ten d en cies le s s e n s , a p o in t should be reached xvhsre d riv e c e ases to be @ d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g f a c t o r and th© perform ance o f th© two c la s s e s o f s u b je c ts i s n e a rly equal*

I n the extreme s i t u a t i o n where few o r

no in c o r r e c t ten d en c ie s a re e l i c i t e d by th© ta s k , i n ­ creased a n x ie ty should f a c i l i t a t e performance*

This s t a t e

o f a f f a i r s i s re p re se n te d a t th e r i g h t end o f th© diagram in F ig u re 1 , which in d ic a te s th© s u p e r io r ity o f the anxious su b je c ts*

I n a l l c a s e s , d riv e a c ts to in c re a se th©

d iffe re n c e between th© s tro n g e r and weaker repons© te n ­ d e n c ie s and i n t h i s manner h elp s determ ine f i n a l p e r f o r ­ mance* On th© assum ption th a t th© v a r ia b le s o f i n t r a l i s t s i m i l a r i t y and a s s o c ia tio n value o f item s i n rot©

UJ cc D CO ---------------------------------------------------------------^ HIGH

RELATIVE

STRENGTH

AS COMPARED WITH

OF CO RRECT

INCORRECT T ENDE N CIE S

F igure 1 . A diagram in d ic a tin g changes exp ected in h y p o th e tic a l performance measures fo r anxious and nonanxious s u b je c ts as a fu n c tio n o f th e r e la t iv e str en g th o f c o r r e c t te n d e n c ie s as com­ pared w ith in c o r r e c t te n d e n c ie s in a le a r n in g s it u a t io n .

s e r i a l le a rn in g should a f f e c t the r e l a t i v e s tre n g th s o f c o r re c t and in c o r r e c t ten dencies* th© h y p o th e sis o u tlin e d above was te s te d by th e use o f th ro e l i s t s o f nonsense s y lla b le s *

th e f i r s t o f th e se employed s y lla b le s o f

h ig h s i m il a r it y and low a s s o c ia tio n v a lu e , th e second, s y lla b le s o f low s i m il a r it y and low a s s o c ia tio n value w hile th© th i r d used s y lla b le s o f low s i m ila r it y and h ig h a s s o c ia tio n value* I n term s o f th© h y p o th esis as diagrammed in f ig u r e 1 , th e ta s k in v o lv in g th© h ig h e s t degree of i n t r a l i s t s i m il a r it y should f a l l f a r t h e s t to th e l e f t , w ith th e nonanxious s u b je c ts probably s u p e rio r in performance* The second ta s k , In v o lv in g le s s i n t r a l i s t s i m il a r i t y , should f a l l somewhat to th e r i g h t In term s of perform ance m easures, w ith h ig h er perform ance f o r both groups but w ith th e anxious s u b je c ts showing the g r e a te r In crease* fh© -*"$Tt h i r d t a s k , w ith s y lla b le s of high a s s o c ia tio n v a lu e , should y ie ld perform ances © t i l l f a r t h e r to th e r i g h t , w ith s t i l l g r e a te r r e l a t i v e improvement f o r th© anxious sub­ je c ts *

E m p irical curves connecting th© perform ance

m easures f o r each c la s s o f s u b je c ts should, under th© p re s e n t h y p o th e s is , dem onstrate a s te e p e r slope o f improve­ ment o f perform ance, from l e f t to r i g h t , f o r th© anxious su b je c ts* I t i s b eliev ed t h a t r e s u l t s confirm ing the above

15 p re d ic tio n s may b© considered as len d in g su p p o rt to th© n o tio n of a n x ie ty a s drive*

In th e same manner, p o s itiv e

r e s u l t s w i l l lend s tr e n g th to th e pro p o sal t h a t th e d i f f e r e n t i a l e f f e c t s o f a n x ie ty upon c o n d itio n in g and rot© le a rn in g a re a t l e a s t p a r t i a l l y e x p lic a b le in term s o f th e m u ltip lic a tiv e fu n c tio n of d riv e and th e n a tu re o f th e p a r t i c u l a r re sp o n se s, th e ten d en c ie s to which ©re augmented by th e e f f e c tiv e drive*

16

C hapter XX KXPimiMENTAL FHOGSDUH33 The ex p erim en tal p la n c o n siste d o f running independent groups o f anxious and nonanxious s u b je c ts on each of th re e s e r i a l r o te le a rn in g task s*

These

ta s k s in v o lv ed , r e s p e c tiv e ly , th e th re e degrees of r e la tio n s h ip in d ic a te d in tho statem en t o f th e problem , i . e . hig h s i m il a r it y and low m eaningfulness o f ite m s, low s i m i l a r i t y and low m eaningfulaess o f ite m s, and item s of high m eaningfulness and low s im ila r ity * S u b je c ts A ll s u b je c ts were un d erg rad u ates a t th© S ta te U n iv e rsity o f Iowa, were naive concerning th e experim ent, and were s e le c te d on th© b a s is of sc o re s obtained on a m o d ific a tio n o f th© A nxiety Seal© devised by Xaylor (1 5 ), 1 a s d e sc rib e d by Rosenbaum (15 )* Sixty**four s u b je c ts w ith 1* This A nxiety S cale (seen In Appendix a) u ses f i f t y o f th e Item s of th e M innesota M ultipliesic In v e n to ry which had shown th e h ig h e st c o r r e la tio n w ith the t o t a l a n x ie ty sco re on the o r ig in a l scale* The 1 s c a le of th e M I was used to d e te c t f a ls e low s c o re s , an 1 sco re o f seven or above (upper te n p e rc e n t) e lim in a tin g a stu d e n t from c o n s id e ra tio n f o r th© experim ent. M $ fe s

n in e or below (low er tw enty p e rc e n t) made up

th e nonanxious group, w hile seventy s u b je c ts w ith s c o re s o f t h i r t y o r above (ujipor te n p e rc e n t) made up the

17 an x io us g roup.

I n both anxious and nonanxious groups,

th e sex d i s t r i b u t i o n was approxim ately th e same f o r the th re e ex p erim en tal co n d itio n s# A7)P aratue and Method The experim ent was conducted in a w e ll- lig h te d , q u ie t room#

A H u ll-ty p e memory drum was mounted on and

between two t a b l e s , behind a gray fib e r-b o a rd screen*

The

exposure a p e rtu re o f the drum was v i s i b le through a 2* X 6 11 opening in the screen*

S y lla b le s appeared through

an opening, 1 -1 /8 " X 7/8***

A sm all lamp, concealed from

the s u b je c t, provided Illu m in a tio n f o r th e ap ertu re* Three l i s t s o f t h r e e - l e t t e r nonsense s y lla b le s , o f tw elve s y lla b le s each , were typed in c a p ita l l e t t e r s on an e n d le s s w hite tape*

l i s t 1 was made up of item s o f

high s i m i l a r i t y and low a s s o c ia tio n value and w i l l be d e sig n a te d the d i f f i c u l t task*

l i s t I I contained s y lla b le s

o f low s i m i l a r i t y and low a s s o c ia tio n value and w i l l be d e d i c a t e d a s th e l i s t of medium d i f f ic u lty *

L is t I I I

was made up o f s y lla b le s o f low s i m ila r ity and high a s s o c ia tio n value and w i l l be c a lle d th e easy l i s t * S y lla b le s f o r a l l l i s t s came from M elton*s com pilation o f v e rb a l le a rn in g m a te r ia ls ( l o ) , using th e a s s o c ia tio n v alu es determ ined by Glaase (

4

) # Each l i s t was typed

s e r i a l l y i n fo u r d i f f e r e n t o rd e rs , a l l o rd e rs u sin g th e

18 6a m s y lla b le sequence but beginning r e s p e c tiv e ly w ith th e f i r s t , f o u r th , se v e n th , and te n th s y lla b le s o f the b a s ic l i s t s *

Uh© b a s ic l i s t s , w ith t h e i r average a s s o c ia tio n

v a lu e s and r u l e s f o r c o n s tru c tio n {which were used to d e fin e form al s im ila r ity ) a re given in Appendix B* S y lla b le s were p re se n ted s e r i a l l y , w ith a two* second exposure tim e and a two-second in te r v a l between ex p o su res, d u rin g which in te r v a l a black s h u tte r covered th e ap e rtu re*

An i n t e r v a l of s ix seconds elap sed between

th e d isap p earan ce o f th e f i n a l sy llab i© on one t r i a l and th© appearance o f th e f i r s t sy llab i© on th e next t r i a l * I n s tr u c tio n s ware o f th e u su a l ty p e 'f o r a n tic ip a tio n le a rn in g and m y be seen i n Appendix C*

S u b jects were

in s tr u c te d to u se each sy llab i© as th© cue fo r c a llin g out th© succeeding s y lla b le b efo re i t s appearance* served a s th e cue f o r th© f i r s t s y lla b le *

An a s t e r i s k

S u b je c ts were

re q u ire d to s p e l l o u t s y lla b le s and were encouraged but n o t re q u ire d to make a v e rb a l response a t each exposure* Im m ediately fo llo w in g th© in s tr u c tio n s and th e answ ering o f any q u e s tio n s , th e le a rn in g ta s k began.

Ho f u r th e r

communication took p la c e , except f o r th e c o rre c tio n o f s p e llin g e r r o r s , u n t i l the com pletion of th© task* ; The ex p erim en ter o p erated th© memory drum from behind th© s c re e n , from which p o s itio n he could a t a l l time© observe th e s u b je c t by means o f a m irro r arrangem ent w ith o u t him* s e l f being observed by th e su b ject*

19

Procedure and Design Anxious and nonanxious s u b je c ts were randomly assig n ed to each o f th© th re e l i s t s *

L is ts XI

and XII were p resen ted to tw enty anxious and tw enty non­ anxious s u b je c ts f o r tw e n ty -fiv e t r i a l s *

I n the i n i t i a l

p a r t of the In v e stig a tio n # L is t I was a ls o p resen ted fo r tw e n ty -fiv e t r i a l s but proved so d i f f i c u l t as to allo w l i t t l e lea rn in g *

T h e re fo re , a f t e r th© running of fo u r

anxious and te n nonanxious s u b je c ts , tw enty a d d itio n a l s u b je c ts from anxious and nonanxious groups were ru n to fo rty -fiv e tr ia ls *

S u b jects i n each group and c o n d itio n

were a ssig n e d , in th e o rd e r o f t h e i r appearance in th e la b o ra to r y , to each o f th e fo u r o rd ers of th© H o t s , so th a t o n e -fo u rth of tho su b je c ts in each subgroup learn ed each of th e fo u r orders*

This was done in o rd e r to

reduce p o s s ib le g ross i r r e g u l a r i t i e s in th© s e r i a l p o s itio n curves due to th e chance lo c a tio n o f a p a r tic u ­ l a r l y easy o r d i f f i c u l t a s s o c ia tio n a t a c e r ta in p o s itio n In th© l i s t * A summary o f sen ted below: CQKDITION X (45 t r i a l s ) D i f f i c u l t : low assoc* v a lu e , high s i m il a r it y ANXIOUS (N 2 0 ) NONANXIOUS (N 2 0)

th© experim ental d esig n I s p re ­ GCMOTXOH XI (25 t r i a l s ) Medium: low assoc* v a lu e , low s im ila r ity A s n o u s (N 2 0 ) NONAMIQUS (N 2 0 )

COHDITION XIX (25 t r i a l s ) Easy: high assoc* v a lu e , low s i m ila r ity AMICUS HGMXI0U3

20 As p re v io u s ly n o ted , fo u r a d d itio n a l anxious s u b je c ts and te n a d d itio n a l nonanxiou® s u b je c ts were ru n f o r tw e n ty -fiv e t r i a l s only under C ondition I ,

Where

a p p ro p ria te the r e s u l t s f o r th e se subject® w i l l be in clu d ed i n th e a n a ly s is of th e r e s u lts *

21 C hapter XXI HBSTJXffS Compaid son o f Perform ance Under Three C onditlone Perform ance cu rv es, p lo tte d f o r anxious and nonanxious s u b je c ts under each c o n d itio n ar© shown in F ig u re s 2 , 3# and 4*

la o h p o in t on th e s e curves re p re s e n ts

the mean number o f c o r r e c t a n tic ip a tio n s p e r t r i a l over a block of fiv e t r i a l s *

Comparison o f th e th re e s e ts of

curves re v e a ls a d iffe r e n c e in l i s t d i f f i c u l t i e s * C ondition I

2

produced perform ance m easures t h a t were much

2* Two s e t s o f curves are p re se n t fo r C ondition X# The s h o r te r curves in clu d e the sco res o f th e fo u r anxious and t e n nonanxious s u b je c ts who ra n to only tw entyfiv e t r i a l s * low er than th o se f o r th e o th e r co n ditions*

While th e

d iffe re n c e between C onditions XX and XXI i s le s s marked* in s p e c tio n o f th e curves in d ic a te s a more ra p id r i s e fo r C o n d itio n I I I *

I t may be seen t h a t under C ondition X

( d i f f i c u l t U s t ) nonanxious s u b je c ts were g e n e ra lly s u p e rio r to th e anxious s u b je c ts and th a t t h i s s u p e r io r ity was g r e a te r a f t e r the e a r ly t r i a l s .

Perform ance under

C ondition I I (medium d i f f i c u l t y ) showed the same s u p e r io r ity o f nonanxious su b je c ts*

However, the curves r e v e a l a

l e s s m rk e d d iffe re n c e between th e two groups, and th e re

CD o ro

ro

ft to i>* -H (DH-P X ro P < > -H t l •H CO G CtJ

rG

O

C/J G |W

—I

p

f t to to O *H G

i—I n

fyH o -p

LCO G I— G H *H

1 o n

ro

txC-H W w

O 'H H

G O

f t f t to to to f t H to *H G G P

CM H

co O 0 p -P Pi •H O P| •|_3*H 0

o o Pi •rt

P

o£dd P o OP0 0 O Xo o fn I o a H Pi CO B

o

S - VC 7

>

r o UJ

“

h -

00 t, e

3.8 P 0

u

nj i•H — I

0

P

P CO *H ■3 £

Ph

0

>

O

H cti V C,

CJ

•H ctf Ph ri sd P 0 i O CO 5=3 P

S 0 P 0

H

o

txC fd

id o

Pi Ph P,

0 P0h P hO

JO d 3 9 W n N

rH

33 cd

Jh O ■H O > a p •H P < H0 O £ •H 0 -d- *H cd O o . *\ 0 0 ft •rl (8 p ctJ O H to 3 r P •H rd *H .G txoo P *H H •H fij C U Ph Pd cd p cti id

CM

SNOlJLVdI0I1NV I 0 3 d d 0 0

cd

NV3W

p

to

a

H H

CM

P O

CM

0

Ph O

Ph Ph O O

•H P P| •H o

Ph

0

P

1cti

O r"» 0 '!~5 •H P R? d 0 0

o 0 O P dod 0 d Ph

o

Pi lO i

o 2 I—I o 50 •H P 0 g •H rH 8 cd

_ )

0


Ph d 0 O P

= CC

Ph

p I— I cd O 0 •H B c£d •£ p0dPP 0 u

Ci

•H

0

Q UJ

h

o

Pi Ph

0

Ph

to

S NOI l Vdl Ol l NV ± 0 3 9 9 0 0 JO 9 3 9 W n N

NV3W

0

(X

(X

0 0 ?H O •H

fd

aS Ph

Icti !>

bfl

Pd

id

• 0 .H ° Ph O

P p

CP

CM

0

Ph

O

rH

**

0 ft-H id P Ph ^d -0h rH cd to O P -H •rl cd Jd Pi Ph M COP

cd •H O 0 0 0 cd

1

I— I

24 I s l e s s in d ic a tio n o f th e e a r ly © q u ality o f perform ance th a t appeared tinder C ondition X«

I t m y be seen in

F ig u re 4 t h a t a r e v e r s a l o f perform ance f o r th e two groups took p la c e under C ondition 111 {easy l i s t ) *

In

t h i s in s ta n c e th e perform ance curve fo r th e anxious group i s c le a r ly above th a t f o r th® nonanxious group*

Comparison

o f F ig u re s 3 and 4 shows th a t the in c re a s e i n perform ance in changing from C ondition XX to C ondition I I I was much g r e a te r f o r anxious s u b je c ts than f o r nonanxious su b je c ts# Mean sc o re s re p re s e n tin g th e perform ances d isc u sse d above a r e p re se n ted i n f a b le I#

fh© f i r s t f iv e

t r i a l s were excluded because o f th e c u rta ilm e n t o f sc o re s a t th e low er end o f th e perform ance cu rv es, p a r ti c u l a r l y in C ondition X, which m ight n o t have p e rm itte d the appearance o f p o s s ib le d iffe re n c e s betiveen gxmpsu s e t s o f s c o re s were computed f o r C ondition I*

Too

The f i r s t ,

covering t r i a l s 6 -2 5 , was computed in o rd e r to re p re s e n t the same t r i a l blocks from each c o n d itio n and thereby dem onstrate perform ance d iffe re n c e s a t comparable numbers o f t r i a l s under each co n d itio n *

Also i t was d e s ire d to

in clu d e th© perform ance sc o re s o f th e a d d itio n a l s u b je c ts who ra n un d er C ondition X*

The second s e t of sc o re s,

In c lu d in g t r i a l s 26-45# was computed f o r th© purpose o f p re s e n tin g more c le a r ly the r e l a t i o n o f anxious and non­ an x io u s s u b je c ts a f t e r le a rn in g had reached a p o in t more

TaBLB X Mean Humber o f C o rrect Hesponses P e r T r i a l , Over Blocks o f Twenty T r i a l s , fo r Anxious and Honanxious S u b je c ts Under Three C onditions

AHXX0TJ3

N

H0HAM10US

Mean S.D.

N

Mean s .p .

CONDITION XA* (Trials 6-25)

24

5*06

1,31

24

3,44

1.49

CONDITION IB?' {Trials 26-45)

20

6,67

1,99

20

8.06

2,79

CONDITION II (T rials 6-25)

20

6,98

2,00

20

7.79

2.14

CONDITION I II (T rials 6-25)

20

9,91

1.39

20

8.69

2.05

^C ondition XA represent® t r i a l s 6-25 and include© those a d d itio n a l s u b je c ts who ra n to only tw e n ty -fiv e t r i a l s * Since p ro p o rtio n a l numbers of s u b je c ts a re needed fo r a n a ly s is of v a ria n c e , by which th e s e msan© were t e s t e d , tw en ty -fo u r o f th e t h i r t y nonanxious s u b je c ts were s e le c te d by means o f a ta b le of random numbers to be Included w ith th e tw en ty-four anxious s u b je c ts in t h i s ta b le * C ondition IB covers only t r i a l s 26-45, th e re fo re does n o t in clu d e th e s e addition® I su b jects*

26 n e a r ly comparable to th a t seen i n th e o th e r co n d itio n s* T his s e t o f m easures a ls o av o id s th e c u rta ilm e n t e f f e c t s o f e a r ly t r i a l s # which were prolonged under C o n d itio n X. Graphs showing th© r e l a t i v e p o s itio n s o f th e s e mean sc o re s a re p re se n te d in F ig u re s 5 and 6*

F ig u re 5

d e p ic ts th e d iffe re n c e in ta s k d i f f i c u l t i e s when m easures from com parable t r i a l s a re used*

F ig u re 6 g iv e s an

in d ic a tio n o f th© change i n r e l a t i o n between anxious and nonanxious groups under C ondition X when th e c u rta ilm e n t e f f e c t s o f th e e a r ly t r i a l s a re e lim in a te d by u sin g t r i a l s 26- 4 5•

The perform ance d iffe re n c e between th®

two g roups under C ondition X i s more c le a r ly dem onstrated th a n in th e e a r l i e r t r i a l s * The d if f e r e n c e s among th e ex p erim en tal c o n d itio n s and between th® perform ances o f th© anxious and Bonanxious s u b je c ts were te s te d by means of a f a c t o r i a l a n a ly s is of v arian ce*

The f i r s t a n a ly s is in c lu d e s t r i a l s 6-25 under

a l l c o n d itio n s and i s p re se n ted i n Appendix B# Table IF* This a n a ly s is r e v e a ls th a t th© i n te r a c ti o n betw eenlevel o f a n x ie ty and the th re e ex p erim en tal c o n d itio n s was s i g n i f i ­ c a n t a t th e f iv e p e r cent le v e l o f confidence* 3*66# w ith 2 and 122 d eg rees of freedom}*

(F r a t i o -

I n o rd e r to

d eterm ine th e p a r t i c u l a r com binations of c o n d itio n s most l i k e l y to hav® produced th© i n t e r a c ti o n e f f e c t , f u r th e r a n a ly s e s o f each com bination o f two c o n d itio n s were

27 a O >O73

O73 El

Q UJ

rt -P

O

«*x

O1A

O3 i=2 Q

rt OJ xs

o o Q

Ow

cu rt 0 rt o rt p rt p rt w CLP •rt o O 0 •rt ■x> P p rt rt rt CO

0

b