Anooshian L J, Prilop L
Child Dev. 1980 Mar;51(1):45-54.
Using the central-incidental learning task, we examined central task scores and numbers of correctly recognized incidental words for 48 children each from the first, fourth, and seventh grades, and for 48 adults. Differences in developmental trends were observed for subjects who heard related pairs of central and incidental words (compound words), unrelated word pairs, and central words only (control condition). In experiment 2, when incidental words were rhymes or synonyms of central words, fourth graders performed as well as did adults in the central phase of the task. Also, fourth graders were as likely to recognize incidental words which had rhymed as those that had been synonyms of central words; adults recognized more synonyms than rhymes. The results of both experiments confirmed that researchers must assess the nature of the task demands, as well as differentiate between valiables affecting central versus incidental learning scores, in deriving estimates of selectivity.
我们使用集中-附带学习任务，对48名一年级、四年级和七年级的儿童以及48名成年人进行了测试，考察了他们的集中任务得分以及正确识别的附带单词数量。对于听到相关的集中词和附带词对（复合词）、不相关词对以及仅听到集中词（对照条件）的受试者，观察到了发展趋势的差异。在实验2中，当附带词是集中词的押韵词或同义词时，四年级学生在任务的集中阶段表现与成年人一样好。此外，四年级学生识别与集中词押韵的附带词的可能性与识别作为集中词同义词的附带词的可能性相同；成年人识别的同义词比押韵词更多。两个实验的结果都证实，研究人员在得出选择性估计值时，必须评估任务要求的性质，并区分影响集中学习得分与附带学习得分的变量。
