Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
SHORT TERM AUDITORY STORAGE CAPACITY OFSKILLED SIGNERS FOR LINGUISTIC INFORMATION.
Item Type text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic)
Authors VALLANDINGHAM, RICHARD ROBERT.
Publisher The University of Arizona.
Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this materialis made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona.Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such aspublic display or performance) of protected items is prohibitedexcept with permission of the author.
Download date 28/06/2018 15:28:04
Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/184725
INFORMATION TO USERS
This reproduction was made from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this document, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted.
The following explanation of techniques is provided to help clarify markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction.
1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure complete continuity.
2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark, it is an indication of either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, duplicate copy, or copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed: For blurred pages, a good image of the page can be found in the adjacent frame. If copyrighted materials were deleted, a target note will appear listing the pages in the adjacent frame.
3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photographed, a definite method of "sectioning" the material has been followed. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again-beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete.
4. For illustrations that cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic means, photographic prints can be purchased a· additional cost and inserted into your xerographic copy. These prints are available upon request from the Dissertations Customer Services Department.
5. Some pages in any document may have indisi.l:1ct print. In all cases the best available copy has been filmed.
University Micrc5films
International 300 N. Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, MI48106
8227375
Vallandingham, Richard Robert
SHORT TERM AUDITORY STORAGE CAPACITY OF SKILLED SIGNERS FOR LINGUISTIC INFORMATION
The University of Arizona
University Microfilms
International
PH.D. 1982
300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106
j
j
j
j
j
j j
j j
j j
j j
j j
j j
j j
j j
j j
j j
j j
j j
j j
j j
j
j
j j
j j
j j
j j
j j
j j
j j
j j
j
j j
j j
j j
j
j
j j
j
j
j
j
j
j j
SHORT TERM AUDITORY STORAGE CAPACITY OF SKILLED
SIGNERS FOR LINGUISTIC INFORMATION
by
Richard Robert Vallandingham
A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the
DEPARTMENT OF REHABILITATION
In Partial Fulfillment of-the Requirements For the Degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
In the Graduate College
THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
1 982
THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA GRADUATE COLLEGE
As members of the Final Examination Committee, we certify that we have read
the dissertation prepared by Richard Robert Va J J andingbam
entitled ____________ ~S~H~O~R~T~T~E~RM~~A~U~D~I~T~O~R~Y~S~T~O~RA~G~E~ ______________ __
CAPACITY OF SKILLED SIGNERS
FOR LINGUISTIC INFORMATION
and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Da
Date
7-J--~Z---Date
Date
Date
Final approval and acceptance of this dissertation is contingent upon the candidate's SUbmission of the final copy of the dissertation to the Graduate College.
I hereby certify that I have read this dissertation prepared under my direction and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement.
Dissertation Director
STATEMENT BY AUTHOR
This dissertation has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library.
Brief quotations from this dissertation are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgement of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when, in his judgment, the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances I however", permission must be obtained from the author.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I wish to express my appreciation to all members
of my committee for their help and support throughout the
development of this dissertation. Dr. Armin Turechek
and Dr. Noel Matkin were particularly helpful in criti
quing my writing. Dr. Inez Tucker and Dr. Bob Johnson
offered invaluable advice in the proposal stage, as well
as throughout my doctoral studies.
I wish to thank the Grand Canyon Registry of
Interpreters for the Deaf and the University of Arizona
Interpreter Training Program for the cooperation and
assitance which made this study possible.
Randy Jones was of spe.cial assistance in the
analysis and interpretation of the data. In addition,
his sense of humor helped ease the way through the deep
water of statistics. A special thanks to Ann Cotegeorge
for the fine graphs.
My fellow doctoral students in the Department of
Rehabilitation were integral parts of the supportive
network which helped me through the entire process.
Charlene, Kay, Rod, John, Kris, Liz, and all the Jims,
Bob, Phil, Dave, Joe, the Kathys, Ron, Kevin and the gang
iii
that gave meaning to the word comrade. Many thanks for
that.
iv
Susie, my wife, was the most special of all. Her
support was unwavering, her humor undying, and her
encouragement never-ending.
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
LIST OF TABLES
ABSTRACT . . .
1. THE PROBLEM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction . Significance of the problem Statement of the problem . Hypotheses .... Definition of terms
2. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE .
Sign language research . Second language learning Memory and language Summary . . . . .
3. METHODS AND PROCEDURES
Experimental samples Stimulus materials Procedure ... . Data analysis
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Page
vii
. viii
.. .
ix
1
1 3 5 6 7
9
9 12 14 28
30
30 31 33 34
36
Syntatically correct recall 39 Syntactic STS and group effects . 39 Syntactic STS and age of subject 42 Syntactic STS and sex of subject 42 Syntactic STS and years of college 44
Conceptually correct recall . . . . . . • •. 44 Conceptual STS and group effects 45 Conceptual STS and age of subjects 47 Conceptual STS and sex of subjects 49 Conceptual STS and years of college . 49
Discussion . . .. ....•.... 49
v
5.
TABLE OF CONTENTS--Continued
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . .
Summary • • • • • . Conclusions . • • .
APPENDIX A: PROVERB AND SENTENCE LISTS .
APPENDIX B: DATA COLLECTION FORM • .
REFERENCES
vi
Page
53
53 . 56
• . 58
. 75
77
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure Page
1. Proportion syntactically correct responses as a function of serial position, all subjects (N=30) • . • • . . • • . . • . . • • . 37
2. Proportion conceptually correct responses as a function of serial position, all subj ects (N=30) • • • • . • . • • . • • . • . • 38
3. Proportion syntactically correct responses of proverbs as a function of serial position by groups . • . . • . • . • . ..•. 41
4. Proportion syntactically correct responses of sentences as a function of serial posi tion by groups . • . • • . . • •• ..• 43
5. Proportion conceptually correct responses of proverbs as a function of serial position by groups . . . . . • . . • • • . . . 46
6. Proportion conceptually correct responses of sentences as a function of serial position by groups . . . . . . . . . . . . • . 48
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Recall scores by group . . . . • 50
2. Recall scores by age of subject . · 51
3. Recall scores by sex of subject • 51
4. Recall scores by years of college completed • 52
viii
ABSTRACT
The principle purpose of this study was to
investigate the short term auditory storage and retrieval
abilities of skilled interpreters for the deaf. Secon
dary attention was given to age, sex, and educational
level variables related to recall abilities.
It was assumed that the task of interpreting
spoken English to ASL involved short term auditory storage,
the efficacy of which was related to chunking abilities of
the listener. Measures of short term storage for familiar
and novel information (sentences) were employed by
estimates of chunking efficiency.
Three groups of ten subjects each made up the
sample population. Group A was composed of individuals
with interest in but limited knowledge of sign language.
Group B was composed of individuals with no knowledge of
sign language. Group C was composed of individuals
holding the Comprehensive Skills Certificate from the
National Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf.
Free-recall short term storage tasks were
utilized to evaluate recall efficiency of the sample
groups for familiar and unfamiliar information. English
proverbs were used for the familiar stimuli and novel
ix
sentences generated from the proverbs were used for the
unfamiliar stimuli.
x
Results indicate that skilled interpreters perform
extremely efficiently on recall tasks involving concep
tually accurate recall of novel sentences. No significant
relationship was noted between age, sex and educational
level factors and recall scores. The results were inter
preted as supporting the hypothesis that skilled interpre
ters for the hearing impaired are efficient chunkers of
linguistic information. A discussion of the results and
needs for further research are presented.
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Interpreting for persons with hearing losses in
the United States has been occurring since sign language
was formally initiated into the educational system at
the American Asylum for the Deaf (now American School for
the Deaf) in Hartford, Connecticut in 1815. At present,
it is estimated that there are nearly two million pre
vocationally deaf individuals who can not communicate via
the auditory channel with or without amplification
(Schein & Delk, 1974). For these individuals, inter
preting services provide opportunities to function equally
with hearing persons with access to communication.
Interpreting refers to the "act a person performs
when conveying one person's message to another" (Caccamise,
1980, p. 1) and may involve a change in the mode of
communication used by the sender, a change in the language
used by the sender, or both. Provision of interpreting
services for persons with hearing losses involves two
languages and two communication modes. The two languages
usually involved in the interpreting process are English
and American Sign Language (ASL) , although a distinction
should be made between written and spoken English. Modes
1
of communication usually involved in the interpreting
process are oral/aural (spoken English) and manual/visual
(sign language/fingerspelling).
A manual/visual language, ASL utilizes arbitrary,
rule-governed symbols as meaningful communication units.
These symbols involve combinations of hand shapes, posi
tions, orientations, and movements along with direction of
the signer's eyes, facial expressions, and body posture
(Caccamise & Gustafson, 1979~ Klima & Bellugi, 1979;
Siple, 1978). ASL is now generally recognized as a
distinct language with its own grammar (Stokoe, 1978).
In order to fulfill the role as facilitator in a
normal communication situation,the interpreter for the
hearing impaired must translate spoken English to sign
language as a sender and sign language into spoken
English as a receiver. Such two-way communication situ
ations involve aural/oral and manual/visual modes of
communication. The perceptual and cognitive processes
involved in the interpreting situation will depend on the
communication mode in operation at a given point in time.
In other words, the processes involved in voice-to-sign
interpreting will be different than the processes
involved in sign-to-voice interpreting. Investigation of
interpreting skills should therefore approach each mode
separately.
2
The interpreting of spoken English into ASL
requires the interpreter to (1) encode an auditory input
(stimulus) into a meaningful unit or chunk of information.
(2) store the unit or chunk in some sort of memory store,
(3) retrieve a semantically equivalent sign unit from
linguistic memory, and (4) express the communicative unit
in manual/visual form (Marslen-Wilson, 1975; Grosjean,
1980). Systematic investigation of this process is
3
needed in order to define interpreter aptitudes and skills,
assess interpreter training programs, and develop
screening/assessment tools for interpreting training
programs.
significance of the Problem
Demand for competent interpreters for the hearing
impaired is becoming more widespread. In addition inter
preting for the hearing impaired is gaining acceptance as
a recognized profession. The communication situations in
which interpreters are utilized are increasing in number
and diversity and include such areas as educational, legal,
medical, social, business, and psychotherapy (Babbini, R.,
Montarelli, D., & Quigley, S., 1974). Increased public
awareness of the needs of the deaf, including passage of
Federal legislation that guarantees the rights of handi
capped citizens to "equal access" (Education for All
Handicapped Children Act, PL 94-142 and the Vocational
Rehabilitation Act of 1975, Sections 503 and 504),
initiated this increased need for interpreters. This
demand has resulted in the establishment of interpreter
training programs throughout the country.
4
Training of individuals to become competent,
skilled interpreters for the hearing impaired requires an
understanding of the skills and/or apptitudes necessary
for skilled interpreting. At present, our knowledge and
understanding of interpreter competence is somewhat
limited with interpreter competency viewed as a "con
glomerate of skills ... some more important than others ...
partly technical, partly psychomotor, partly cognitive,
partly attitudinal, and part experiential" (Caccamise,
1980, pp. 20-21). A clearer understanding and definition
of the aptitudes and skills necessary for competent inter
preting requires careful investigation of the component
parts of interpreting.
Careful delineation of skills and aptitudes pre
requisite for or required in skilled interpreting is
necessary in order to efficiently plan curriculum for
interpreter training programs. Skills and aptitudes
found to be highly correlated to interpreter competency
may serve as a basis for a test battery to evaluate an
individual's aptitude for interpreting. Such information
would allow interpreter training programs to be selective
in the acceptance of applicants.
Statement of the Problem
It was the purpose of this study to investigate
the short term auditory storage (STS) abilities of
skilled interpreters. Stud~es dealing with the precep
tion of sentences have indicated that a sentence pro
cessed through the aUditory channel "may be grouped or
segmented during listening into processing units or
chunks which correspond to large linguistic constituents
in surface-phrase structure ... natural linguistic units,
such as sentences and clauses" and interpreted before
the limited short term memory store is exceeded
(Jarvella, 1971, p. 409). The listener encodes a
semantic product which is a joint function of input
information and prior knowledge in long term (semantic
or secondary) memory (Herriot, 1974; Eysencky, 1977).
The amount of information which may be stored in STS
is a function of the individual's ability to chunk the
presented information (Miller, 1956; Johnson, 1970;
Murdock, 1974).
In the process of interpreting spoken English to
ASL, the interpreter must encode the auditory stimuli
5
6
using syntactic and semantic information, then store the
encoded information while it is recoded into ASL. The
present study hypothesizes that individuals who are
skilled in the area of interpreting for the hearing
impaired are also efficient in the encoding/chunking of
information. This is related to general language compe-
tency. Since the capacity of STS is a function of
encoding/chunking ability, the efficiency of skilled
interpreters in encoding/chunking of information would be
reflected in improved STS capacity for linguistic material
such as sentences.
Hypotheses
The research questions generated in the present
study were:
1. Is there a significant difference between the performance of skilled interpreters and the performance of a random group of individuals with no knowledge of sign language on a linguisticallybased STS task?
2. Is there a significant difference between the performance of skilled interpreters and the performance of college students with interest in but limited knowledge of sign language on a linguistically-based STS task?
Stated as null hypothesis, the questions become:
1. There is no significant difference between the mean STS capacity for linguistic stimuli of skilled signers and a random group of non-signers. Stated differently,
XI=XR
7
where XI represents the mean STS scores of skilled
interpreters and XR represents the mean STS scores
of a random group of non-signers.
2. There is no significant difference between the mean STS capacity of skilled signers and a random group of college students interested in sign language. Stated differently,
XI=XCS where XI represents the mean STS scores of the
skilled interpreters and XCS represents the' mean
STS scores of interested college students.
Definition of Terms
1. American Sign Language (ASL): A manual-visual
language utilized by the deaf in the United States in
which arbitrary, rule-governed combinations of hand-
shapes, positions, or orientations, and movements are
meaningful communication units.
2. Chunk: A particular amount of information
that has specific psycholinguistic significance for the
individual.
3. Interested College Students: Students with
interest in but limited knowledge of sign language as
evidenced by enrollment in Rehabilitation 200 A or B
(Introduction to Deafness) at the University of Arizona.
4. Long Term Storage (LTS): A large capacity
mechanism which is the repository of our more permanent
knowledge skills. Also referred to as Secondary Memory (SM).
8
5. Non-signers: Individuals with no knowledge of
sign language as determined by self-report of the
subjects.
6. Short Term Storage (STS): A limited capacity
mechanism in which information is held for short periods
of time (less than 20 seconds). Also referred to as
Primary Memory (PM).
7. Skilled Interpreter: An individual holding
the Comprehensive Skills Certificate (CSC) from the
National Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf.
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
The review of the related literature examines the
following areas:
1. Skills and aptitudes related to sign language
competency necessary in interpreting for the hearing
impaired.
2. The relationship between language skills and
second language learning.
3. The relationship between human memory and
language abilities.
Sign Language Research
Relevent research in the area of interpreting
skills is scant. Much of the available literature has
been tutorial in nature. Few experimental studies in the
literature have dealt with topics which are directly
applicable to skills required for interpreting. Siple,
Hatfield, & Caccamise, F. (1978) investigated the "role of
visual perceptual abilities in the acquisition and compre
hension of sign language" (p. 14). To evaluate visual
perceptual skills, four paper-and-pencil tests of
visual perception (closure flexibility, spatial
9
10
manipulation, perceptual speed, and Gestalt completion
tests) were administered. The utilization of such paper
and-pencil measures raises the question of whether the
perceptual skills tested may not be more closely
associated with those utilized in the reading of written
or printed English rather than in the comprehension of
three-dimensional, dynamic stimuli such as sign language.
While the authors state that tests of detection and
recognition of visual features may be predictive of
rates of manual language acquisition, it is doubtful if
such tests measure the perceptual skills used by inter
preters for the hearing impaired in the day-to-day
performance of their interpreting roles. Although visual
perceptual skills are undoubtedly important for the
interpreting of sign language to spoken English, the
process involved in comprehending dynamic visual stimuli
may be different from the process evaluated with a two
dimensional static stimulus.
A similar problem is encountered in the work of
Mowl (1981) who addressed the need to develop "a battery
of aptitude tests for characteristics that the interpreter
must possess" (p. 7). Mow1 evaluated the use of a
paper-and-pencil word completion (missing letters) test
as a predictor of achievement in reading fingerspelling.
A correlation was shown in the study (Pearson r=.775,
p=.OOl) between performance on the word completion task
and performance on a fingerspelling test. The author
states that there is "a strong degree of relation-
11
ship between the skills of reading fingerspelling and
anticipation of context with missing information" (p. 8).
This relationship between the two measures may be a
function of linguistic (semantic) memory rather than the
perceptual processes involved. The findings emphasize
the linguistic basis of interpreting but do not address
the skills required for interpreting.
The majority of the research in the area of sign
language has dealt with a linguistic description of ASL.
A variety of topics have been investigated: sociolin
guistics (Woodward, 1973), historical changes
(Frishberg, 1978), syntax (Stokoe, 1978), and borrowings
from English through fingerspelling (Battison, 1978).
Research dealing with cerebral lateralization of
hearing and deaf subjects has indicated that hearing
signers process sign language in a manner different than
native signers. In a study conducted by Ross, Pergament,
& Anisfled (1979) subjects were given a series of trials
in which they were first presented with videotaped signs
and then a word exposed tachistoscopically to the right
or left visual field. The subjects were required to judge
12
whether the word corresponded to the sign. The results
suggest that the comparison processes involved were
performed more efficiently by the left hemisphere for
hearing subjects and by the right hemisphere for the deaf
subjects. A similar study of Poizner and Lane (1979) also
used tachistoscopically presented stimuli. The results
were taken to infer that spatial processing required of
signs predominated over language processing in determining
cerebral asymetry of the deaf for these stimuli.
Second Language Learning
Research in the area of second language learning
has dealt with two major topics: Comparing and
contrasting first and second language acquiSition, and
variations in language learning. A search of the litera
ture revealed no research in the area of interpreting of
foreign language and memory storage functions. The area
of language learning is of interest to the present study
since, for most interpreters, the learning of sign
language is a process of learning a second language.
Cognitive variations in language learning reflect
differences in learning strategies (Brown, 1980).
Several factors have been identified as influences upon
language learning strategies. Understanding and respect
for both languages have been shown to improve language
learning abilities (Guiora, Brannon, & Dull, 1972).
Tolerance for ambiguity or flexibility has also been
demonstrated to be an important factor in second
language learning (Brown, 1977).
Other investigators have shown an interest in
personality factors with individuals which contribute to
the success of language learning. Brodkey and Shore
(1976) and Gardner and Lambert (1972) both included
13
measures of self-esteem in their studies of success in
language learning. While no conclusive statistical
evidence emerged from these studies, the results of both
suggest that self-esteem appears to be an important
variable in second language acquisition. The Gardner and
Lambert study also investigated motivation in second
language learning. Over a period of twelve years they
extensively studied foreign language learners in Canada,
several parts of the United States, and the Philippines
in an effort to determine how attitudinal and motivational
factors affect language learning success. Motivation was
examined as a factor of a number of different kinds of
attitudes. Two different clusters of attitudes character
ize two basic types of motivation: instrumental and inte
grative motivation. Instrumental motivation refers to
motivation to acquire a language as means for attaining
instrumental goals, such as advancing in a career. An
integrative motive is employed when a learner wishes to
integrate himself within the culture of the second
language group. The conclusion from these studies was
that integrative motivation may indeed be an important
requirement for successful language learning.
14
Individual differences in second language abilities
were investigated by Snow and Hoefnagel-Hoh1e (1979).
Second language abilities of 51 English speakers learning
Dutch naturalistically were tested at three points during
the first year in the second language environment. The
researchers tested abilities in pronunciation, auditory
discrimination, morphology, syntax, vocabulary, compre
hension of running speech, fluency, and metalinguistic
judgments. A factor analysis revealed two major factors
related to language abilities: grammar plus vocabulary
and phonological ability. Vocabulary test correlated
highly with test of syntax and morphology at all test
sessions. General language skills, therefore, appear to
be correlated with language learning abilities.
Memory and Language
The process by which people retain information
from the external environment is known as memory. Various
attempts have been made to describe information storage.
Recent theories have emphasized two different aspects of
memory: structure and process. Structural theories have
15
suggested that the nature of the information-processing
system impos~s limitation on the rate of information flow
through the system. It is assumed that there is a temporal
sequence to this flow of information which passes from
modality-specific stores through STS to long term storage
(LTS). Process theories have dealt with the variety of
encoding and processing strategies which can be applied
to incoming information (Eysenck, 1977).
Structural theories of information processing
assume that information is initially held in a modality
specific sensory store, but that information is rapidly
lost through decay unless attention is paid to it.
Attended items are transferred to a limited capacity STS
where they are rehearsed or displaced by subsequent items.
Rehearsal maintains items in STS and transfers information
about the items to a semi-permanent LTS (Murdock, 1972).
Process theories of memory assume that a memory
trace consists of a variety of qualitatively distinct
attributes or features of the perceived information
(Tulving & Bower, 1974). These memory traces differ in
terms of their encoded features. Perceptual analysis
involves a hierarchy of levels or stages of analysis
(Triesman, 1964). The more features of a stimulus
encoded at input, the more elaborate will be the resul
tant memory trace (Craik & Tulving, 1975). In terms of
sentence memory. Herriot (1974) hypothesized that tasks
which place a great demand on memory involve coding of
16
the information into integrated chunks or groupings for
efficient storage. The greater the comprehension demands,
the more likely that coding units will be based on seman
tically important points. This requires an interaction of
STS and LTS (primarily semantic memory). Semantic memory
refers to the "cognitive structure which is a result of
general past experiences and maturation. It deals with
input not in terms of its perceptible features but in
terms of its meaning detached from any specified experience.
Thus the semantic memory system is supposed to be concerned
with general items of knowledge, logical and linguistic
rule-systems, and concepts and their relations"
(Herriott, 1974, p. 11).
Several studies have provided experimental
evidence supportive of the STS/LTS concept. Waugh and
Norman (1965) describe an experiment which measured the
recall of a minimally rehearsed verbal item as a joint
function of the number of seconds and the number of other
items following its presentation. Lists of 16 single
digits were presented on tape. The last digit in each
list was one that had occurred exactly once before in
position 3, 5, 7, 9, la, 11, 12, 13, or 14. On its
second appearance, this "probe-digit" was a cue for the
17
recall of the digit that had followed it initially. The
subjects, four Harvard undergraduates, were instructed to
control rehearsal by thinking only of the last presented
item. The results indicated a marked serial position
effect. Probability of recall was effectively zero for
the eleventh item in from the end of a list. The authors
note discrepancies between their findings and previous
research and offer the explanation that, "in the usual
verbal-learning experiment, the likelihood that an item
in a homogeneous list will be recalled tends to increase
with the amount of time available for its rehearsal ...
conversely, material which is not rehearsed is rapidly
lost .... It is as though rehearsal transferred a
recently perceived verbal item from one memory store of
very limited capacity to another more commodious store
from which it can be retrieved at a much later time"
(p. 92). The terms primary memory (PM) and secondary
memory (8M) are used to designate STS and LT8 respectively.
An analysis of recalled words during free recall
was utilized by Tulving and Patterson (1968) to explore
the relation between the size of functional units and the
number of recalled functional units. Subjects recalled
lists of 12, 16, 20, and 24 common words on a single
free-recall trial. Four types of lists were used: One
list of unrelated word and three lists containing four
18
highly related words in addition to unrelated words. The
findings suggest that highly related words are retrieved
as a single functional unit. The authors suggest that
primary and secondary memory represent different types
of retrieval mechanisms. In their analysis, recalled
words were scored as PM/STS items if they had occurred
in the last four input positions of the presentation list.
Capacity of STS was found to remain at 3-4 words
regardless of whether the words were related or unre
lated and regardless of the list length.
In an attempt to quantify the relative contri
bution of short-term and long-term storage (or retrieval)
systems in immediate free recall, Craik (1968) describes
two experiments utilizing free recall of word lists.
Results of the first experiment indicate that neither
the age of the subject nor the size of the set from
which the word lists were drawn affects the size of the
STS component but that both factors affect retrieval
from LTS. Results of the second experiment indicate
that word length affects neither STS nor LTS.
Using lists of both words and nonsense syllables,
Raymond (1969) conducted two experiments on free recall
on a total of 208 college undergraduates. The findings
indicate that recall from LTS is affected by presentation
rate, stimulus material, and frequency of presentation
19
while recall from STS was unaffected. Delay of recall
after presentation was shown to affect STS but not LTS.
This was taken as supportive evidence for the two storage
mechanism model.
A series of five experiments reported by Glanzer,
Gianutsos, and Dubin (1969) represent an attempt to
determine what factors are involved in the removal of
items in STS in free recall tasks. Word lists were used
as stimuli and were presented visually on slides. Various
interfering tasks, such as addition of numbers, were used
to remove items from STS. The authors conclude that
"items are removed from STS by subsequent items that enter
the system. The simple number of these items is the
critical factor" (p. 445).
In two free recall experiments using written and
oral recall, Lewis (1971) presented word lists for two
immediately successive recalls. Results of these experi
ments indicate that last-presented items (which the author
refers to as STS items) are recalled better than earlier
items on recall 1 but not on recall 2. In contrast, ear1y
presented items (LTS items) show little or no difference
in recall probability between recalls. The author states
that the findings are consistent with Waugh and Norman
(1965) and their description of a two-store memory since
"transfer or processing of information from STM to LTM is
20
assumed to be independent of an item's serial position ...
the formulation predicts a relatively flat recency effect
for recall 2" (p. 192).
The exact nature of the STS-LTS relationship has
also undergone experimental analysis. Craik (1970) noted
that "two-process theoriests have themselves split into
two camps: those postulating two stores •.. and those who
argue for one memory store but two retrieval processes"
(p. 143). Since the one-process model and the two-store
model make different predictions regarding the retention
in LTS of items presented in the middle and at the end
of a list, Craik utilized 15-word lists (10 lists per
session, 4 sessions per subject, 20 subjects) under
various input-response combinations. Immediate recall
scores were broken down into STS and LTS components using
a method based on Waugh and Norman (1965) and Tulving and
Colotla (1970). The results indicate that, for a typical
free-recall study, there are no large effects due to either
input or response mode, although auditory presentation was
slightly superior to visual presentation for STS only.
Although the last words in the presentation list ·are
retrieved best in immediate free-recall, they have the
lowest probability of retrieval in the final recall
session. The author states that, "since STS items were
recalled best on immediate recall and since it is known
21
that recall facilitates retrieval on a subsequent trial"
(p. 78), one-process models would predict that STS items
should also be recalled best in final recall. Thus, the
results do not fit with a one-process model but do support
a two-store model.
Short term and long term storage appear to be
useful concepts for structural analysis of memory.
Research which has been directed toward the process
involved for memory tasks indicates an interaction of STS
and LTS for the processing of connected speech. The
auditory perception of a sentence involves a grouping
or segmenting "during listening into processing units or
chunks which correspond to large linguistic constituents
in surface phrase structure, such as the clause" (Jarvella,
1971, p. 409). Miller and Chomsky (1963) suggest that
initial levels of processing have memory correlates for
most extended utterances partly because the listener must
usually process spoken messages in a single pass. The
listener may be able to hold for interpretation only a
limited portion of the units of an utterance to which he
is attending. The listener segments the speech into
natural linguistic units or chunks, such as sentences
and clauses, and interprets them before the limited STS
capacity is exceeded.
22
Jarvella (1971) asked subjects to "listen in a
normal way to long passages of disconnected discourse"
(p. 410). The discourse was interrupted randomly for
testing of immediate recall of the terminal portion of
the speech just presented. The speech contained an
identical sequence of words in one of two syntactic con
figurations. The clause unit previous to the one inter
rupted either belonged to the immediate sentence, or was
part of the previous sentence. The subjects either wrote
down as much as they could remember or wrote only the
first word of the identical sequences given as prompts.
The results indicate the immediate sentence and the
immediately heard clause are retrievable units in memory.
Thus, it appears that "the most recently heard clause and
sentences are organized as speech processing structures
in memory; the processing of structural semantic information
in heard speech operates over these immediate syntactic
units" (p. 415).
Anderson and Paulson (1977) reported two experi
ments which "support a number of assumptions ..• that there
are two sets of memory representation, a short-term
transient state and a more permanent long-term state; the
claim that subjects do retain ..• a verbatim trace of the
sentence; and ..• that this trace is encoded in proposi
tional network form" (p. 450). A reaction time
methodology was used to measure the subjects' memory for
verbatim information relative to presented sentences.
23
Using 10-word lists drawn from I, 2, 4, or 8
different semantic categories, Wetherick (1975) required
immediate verbal recall of 198 subjects. The results
indicate that STS for single-syllable words is negatively
related to the number of semantic categories from which
the words are drawn. The author suggests the results
support a process in which "information in LTS does not
necessarily pass through STS .... Since memory is a by
product of an essentially perceptual system, STS is 'off
to the side· .•. a strategy of continued attention to some
aspects of the stimulus" (p. 479). The results can also
be interpreted as indicating a semantic component of STS
requiring interaction between STS and LTS.
The interaction of STS and LTS in sentence
comprehension was also shown in a study by Craik and
Levy (1970) in which free recall lists containing clusters
of related words either in the middle or at the end of the
list "play a part in the retrieval of the related clusters
of items from terminal positions" (p. 81).
The exact nature of the STS-LTS interaction in
information processing remains a speculative area. Some
researchers hold that sentence material is encoded in
terms of its surface grammatical structure. Surface
24
structure is defined as the analysis of a sentence into
its constituent grammatical parts (Herriot, 1974, p. 68).
For example, a study involving the recall of meaningful
sentences (Johnson, 1968) found that errors follow
certain grammatical patterns. Errors were most likely to
occur at major breaks in the grammatical structure. This
is supportive of the concept that listener encoding of
sentences occurs in terms of grammatical structure.
Other researchers have utilized Chomsky's (1965)
analysis of linguistic structure which maintains that
listeners decode sentence material into its deep structure,
and then recode the information into appropriate surface
structure at recall. Deep structure refers to the under
lying abstract structure of a sentence which determines
the semantic interpretation of the presented information.
Savin and Perchonock (1965) required subjects to recall as
many presented digits as they could in addition to
presented sentences. Differences in the number of digits
recalled with different sentences was assumed to indicate
differences in the codability of the sentences. The
authors conclude that subjects coded the sentence in
terms of its deep structure. Such deep structure coding
would require interaction with LTS.
Evidence of interaction of LTS items and input
information was also reported in a study by Bransford and
Johnson (1972). Obscure passages were presented to the
subjects with some subjects receiving appropriate con
textual information (a picture or the topic of the
passage). This information was given either before or
after the passage. Soon after the passage had been
presented, subjects were asked to recall the passage as
accurately as possible. Contextual information only
increased recall when it was given prior to the passage.
Thus, integration of past knowledge (LTS items) with
present input is important during initial comprehension.
25
The concept of "chunking" is a useful tool in the
measurement of STS. In an analysis of information pro-
cessing, Miller (1953) developed the concept of a "bit"
of information as that unit which reduces the number of
alternatives by one-half. In introducing the "chunk",
Miller (1956) states:
The contrast of the terms bit and chunk also serves to highlight the fact that we are not very definite about what constitutes a chunk of information. For example, the memory span of five words that Hayes obtained ••. might just as appropriately have been called a memory span of 15 phonemes, since each word had about three phonemes in it. Intuitively it is clear that the subjects were recalling five words, not 15 phonemes, but the logical distinction is not immediately apparent. We are dealing here with a process of organizing or grouping the input into familiar units or chunks, and a great deal of learning has gone into the formation of these familiar units (p. 93).
26
A chunk is a particular amount that has specific
psycholinguistic significance. Utilizing two methods for
estimating chunk size, Miller (1956) concluded that the
number of chunks encoded determined STS capacity is a
fixed number.
In a review of the literature relevant to chunking,
Simon (1974) summarizes the information by stating "the
psychological reality of the chunk has been fairly well
demonstrated and the chunk capacity of short-term memory
has been shown to be in the range of five to seven.
Fixation of information in long-term memory has been shown
to take about 5 or 10 seconds per chunk" (p. 487).
The chunking process involves the interaction of
STS and LTS during encoding. Semantic products are
created which are a function of input information and prior
knowledge (Eysench, 1977). Internalized linguistic rules
are part of this prior knowledge system. It follows that
individuals with highly developed internalized linguistic
skills should be highly efficient chunkers of information.
The chunking efficiency cannot be measured directly but
can be estimated utilizing STS measures. If the" infor
mation to be retained in memory is complex (for example,
unrelated sentences), the amount of information retained
in STS will be related to the efficiency of chunking
strategies.
Several methods have been developed to classify
recalled items in terms of type of storage involved,
27
short or long term. One method was suggested by Murdock
(1960). He presented word lists of various lengths for
immediate recall, and found that, for lists of 5-400 words,
recall scores were well fitted by the linear equation
R ~ m + kt,
where R is recall score, t is total presentation time
(thus a function of list length), and m and k are con
stants. Murdock suggests that the intercept constant in
the equation, m is the memory span (STS) while k may be a
function of search-process efficiency.
A second method of estimating the PM/STS component
arises from a study by Waugh and Norman (1965). They
assume that for each of the last seven items in a list,
there is a probability p(i) that the item is in STS/PM.
For item i,
P(i) ~ [R(i) - S(i)]/[l - S(i)]
where R(i) is the probability that item i will be recalled
and S(i) is that probability that the item is in LTS/SM.
The probability S(i) is estimated from the average pro
portion of items recalled from the middle of a long list.
The probability (P(i) may then be estimated for each of the
last seven items by substituting S(i) in the above
equation.
28
An adaptation of the Waugh-Norman technique was
utilized by Tulving and Colotla (1970) in a study of
trilingual free recall. In this experiment, each
recalled word was classified as part of the PM/STS or the
SM/LTS component on the basis of the length of its intra
trial retention interval (ITRI). The length of the ITRI
for any given item was specified in terms of the number of
presentations and recalls of other items occurring
between the presentation and recall of the given item.
Tulving and Patterson (1968) suggest that an
alternate estimate of STS capacity can be obtained from
the number of items recalled from the last four serial
input positions, regardless of output position. Using
lists of 12, 16, 20, and 24 common words, their findings
suggest that the number of retrieved functional units is
independent of the size of the units and that recall from
STS is independent of list length.
Summary
This chapter has been concerned with the theoret
ical and research literature pertaining to interpreter
competency, second language learning, and memory. The
first section of the chapter discussed interpreting skills,
as well as the shortcomings of research to date. Also
discussed was the acknowledgement of ASL as a language.
Since interpreting for the hearing impaired involves a
second language, the second part of the chapter dealt
with second language learning and factors which may
affect success in second language learning. It was
noted that motivation may be a factor in second language
learning. Cognitive strategies were also noted as
29
factors involved in language competency. Therefore, the
final part of the chapter dealt with human memory,
especially STS for linguistic information, such as
sentences. The use of free-recall experiments to evaluate
STS and LTS components of memory was also discussed.
CHAPTER 3
METHODS AND PROCEDURES
This chapter will describe the methods and pro
cedures used in the study. It includes a description of
the experimental samples, materials, test methods, and
analysis procedure.
Experimental Samples
The population under consideration in the study
included three distinct subject groups of ten subjects
each: (2) individuals skilled in the interpreting of
spoken English to ASL, (2) college students with interest
in but limited knowledge of sign language, and (3) a
random group of non-signers. Skilled interpreters were
defined as individuals who hold certification from the
National Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf. Children
of deaf parents were excluded from this group since ASL
may have been the first language learned by such signers.
Interested college students were defined by enrollment
in the Introduction to Deafness classes (Rehabilitation
200A and 200B) at the University of Arizona. This group
was included due to possible motivational effects noted
30
31
in second language learning. The third group consisted of
individuals randomly selected from college students who
had no instruction in sign language.
Each group consisted of five male and five female
subjects. All subjects had auditory thresholds which were
within normal limits as determined by a hearing screening.
A total of 30 subjects was included in the study.
Stimulus Materials
Sixteen free-recall lists were used in the study.
The lists were divided into two groups of eight sentences
each. The first group, presented as Lists 1A-8A in
Appendix A, was composed of familiar sentences. The
second group, Lists 1B-8B, was composed of unfamiliar
sentences The need for evaluation of STS for linguistic
information reflective of the normal requirements in the
interpreting for the hearing impaired situation required
the use of sentence-type material.
Two sets of sentences, English proverbs and novel
sentences were selected to compose the lists. All proverbs
met three criteria: (1) They could be used in independent
sentences. (2) They were seven words or less in length.
(3) They were familiar to native English speakers.
Familiarity was established by having a group of four
judges evaluate each proverb. Only those proverbs
judged familiar by three or more of the four judges
were accepted. Familiar proverbs were selected since
they were large units but likely to be in a subject's
language repertoire.
The novel sentences used in the study were
generated from the proverbs in an attempt to match the
proverb and sentence list groups in terms of vocabulary
and structure in the following manner. Grammatical
structure (surface structure) was determined for each
proverb. Function words such as articles, prepositions,
and auxiliary verbs were left in position. Then, all of
the content words of the proverbs were shifted into the
framework of other proverbs in the set. Examples of
proverbs and the matching novel sentences obtained by
this permutation are:
The end justifies the means/The heart begats the master.
Truth is stranger than fiction/Night is darker than day.
Proverbs selected for use in the study were
randomly assigned to lists lA-SA. Novel sentences gene-
rated were randomly assigned to lists IB-aB. The lists
were recorded on audio tape by a male speaker with a
General American dialect. Space was allowed on the tape
between each sentence presentation for the subject to
repeat the sentence, approximately 3-4 seconds.
32
33
Procedure
Each subject was tested individually in a quiet
room. Before the test procedure of the study was initiated,
each subject was given a hearing screening to substantiate
hearing sensitivity within normal limits. A Beltone 9D
audiometer was used for the screening, performed for
frequencies 250, 500, 4000, and 8000 Ha at 25dB HL by the
investigator who holds certification in audiology from the
American Speech-Language and Hearing Association.
Following the hearing screening, a brief descrip-
tion of the study was given the subjects. The following
instructions were then given to each subject verbally,
by the investigator.
You will now listen to a series of lists. Each list is composed of several sentences. I would like you to repeat each sentence after it is presented to you. At the end of each list, I will ask you to repeat back all the sentences you remember from that list. At the end of the list, repeat back all the sentences you remember as accurately and quickly as possible. Any questions?
The recorded lists were then presented using a
Wollensak 2520 AV tape recorder at a level judged as
comfortably loud by each subject.
At the end of each list, the subject was instructed
in the following manner:
Will you now please repeat all the sentences you remember.
34
Responses were recorded on the Data Collection
Sheet (Appendix B) in terms of accuracy of recall. Each
item recalled was scored as having been either syntactica
cally correct or conceptually correct. Syntactically
correct responses were those which were word-for-word
recalls of the presented item. Conceptually correct
responses were those in which the meaning of the presented
item was maintained but which were not verbatim recalls of
the presented item in that one or two words were changed
or omitted. Information regarding each subject's age,
sex, and educational level achieved (years of college)
was also recorded.
Data Analysis
Responses were recorded as syntactically correct
or conceptually correct. Two sets of data, syntactically
correct recall and conceptually correct recall were
generated. Estimates of STS capacity were obtained from
the number of items recalled from the last four input
positions for each list. Mean STS recall for proverbs
and mean STS recall for novel sentences were determined
for each subject.
The study involved independent samples which did
not meet the assumptions for analysis of variance due to
(1) ordinal rather than interval data (2) non-random
sample (interpreter and interest groups), and (3) small
number (10 per cell). Therefore, a nonparametric test
was used to determine if the three groups in the study
were from different populations.
35
The Kruskall-Wallis one-way analysis of variance
by ranks was employed to test the hypothesis that the
independent samples (Groups A, B, and C) carne from the
same population. Mean STS recall ranks for syntactically
and conceptually correct responses were statistically
compared by age, sex, years of college, and experimental
sample group for proverb and novel sentence lists.
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The study was designed to determine if the ability
of skilled interpreters for the hearing impaired to store
information in STS was significantly different from non
signers with or without interest in sign language. The
analyses of the total study sample involved two sets of
data: syntactically correct recall responses and con
ceptually correct responses. Results of analyses are
presented separately for the two sets of data in terms of
group, age, sex, and level of education (years of college)
effects.
Results
Data from all three experimental sample groups was
compiled and serial position curves were generated for
syntactically correct responses (Figure 1) and conceptually
correct responses (Figure 2). Proportion of correct
recall is plotted as a function of serial position. In
general, the curves show a light primacy effect (improved
recall for first 3-5 serial input position), a flat middle
section (input positions (6-11), and a marked recency
effect (improved recall for serial input positions 12-15).
36
Iu LLJ
.90
.80
.70
0:: .60 0:: o U
z o .50
I-0:: o Q. o .40 0:: Q.
.30
.20
.10
0--0 Proverbs
x----x Novel Sentences
I , I , ,
I I , , , , ,
x ~ " \ I )(---~--)G.., ,X', ,
, 'X--'" 'x I
... " , 'x--~
37
I , I ,
¥ I , I , ,
I
I , I
oL--L--L--L __ L--L~~~ __ ~~~~~~~~~ I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15
SERIAL POSITION Figure 1. Proportion of syntactically co~rect res~onses
as a function of serial position, all subjects (N=30) •
38
.90
.80
0 o Proverbs
x----x Novel Sentences .70 I
I I
l- I 0 IJJ I
a:: .60 I • a:: I 0 I
0 I f f
2 ,50 f
0 • f
l- I
a:: ,
0 I ,
0-0 .40 a:: I
0-f , ,
f , I I I f I , I
.20 'f x..... ...~--~ , I
, ... X'... .., I , "'x' I , I , I
.10 x---~ I "'·x.
4 5 6 1 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15
SERIAL POSITION
Figure 2. Proportion of conceptually correct responses as a function of serial position, all subjects (N=30) •
39
Syntactically Correct Recall
Free-recall responses by sUbjects which were word
for-word repetitions of the presented item were scored
as syntactically correct r~call responses. Estimated STS
capacity for syntactically correct recall was obtained
from the number of syntactically correct recall responses
for the last four input positions for each proverb and
novel sentence list. Mean STS estimates were obtained
by summing across all eight lists in each group. Separate
analyses were computed for the proverb lists group and the
novel sentence lists group.
Syntactic STS and Group Effects
The following analyses utilized syntactically
correct responses to determine the relationship between
STS capacity for verbatim recall and experimental sample
group membership. The groups were labeled as Groups A,
B, and C, and defined in the following manner. Group A:
Individuals with interest in sign language but limited
knowledge of sign language; Group B: Individuals with no
knowledge of or interest in sign language; Group C:
Certified interpreters for the deaf.
The Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance
by ranks technique was used to test the hypothesis that
the independent samples (Groups A, B, and C) represented
the same population. In this procedure, group mean ranks
are statistically compared to determine if the difference
among groups is a result of sampling error or if the
samples signify genuine population differences.
The initial analysis employed the proverb lists
group as the dependent variable and the sampled groups
as the three levels of the independent variable. This
computation resulted in a nonsignificant H (H{2)=2.3l;
40
p < .32), suggesting that the mean rank difference was not
sufficient to conclude that the three groups were signifi
cantly different. In other words, if these observations
were drawn randomly from identically distributed popu
lations, mean ranks as discrepant as these would occur
approximately 32% of the time by chance. Since most
social research considers an alpha level of .05 as
acceptable and this analysis exceeded that level by .27,
the null hypothesis could not be rejected. It was con
cluded that the three groups were similar in terms of
syntactically correct STS recall of proverbs. Proportion
of syntactically correct recall responses as a function of
serial position by groups is presented in Figure 3.
A second analysis employed the novel sentence
lists group as the dependent variable and the sampled
groups as the three levels of the independent variable.
41
.90
.80
0---0 Group A (NISIO)
.70 ~---X Group B (N IS 10)
~--~ Group C (N IS 10)
I-u I.LI .60 0:: 0:: 0 U
Z .50 0 i= 0:: 0 a.. 0 .40 0:: n.
.30
.20
.10
O~~---L--~--~~---L--~--~~~~--~--L-~~~
I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15
SERIAL POSITION Figure 3. Proportion of syntactically correct responses of
proverbs as a function of serial position by group.
42
This computation resulted in a nonsignificant H (H(2)=4.89;
p< .09), suggesting again that the mean rank difference
was not sufficient to warrant rejection of the null
hypothesis. It was concluded that the three groups were
similar in terms of syntactically correct STS recall of
novel sentences. It should be noted, however, that the
mean ranks increased in a non-significant linear fashion
(Group A X=II.20, Group B X=15.45, Group C X=19.85) .
This relationship is graphically illustrated in Figure 4
(note positions 12 through 15) .
Syntactic STS and Age of Subject
Mean rank differences related to age were analyzed
for both proverb and novel sentence lists again utilizing
the Kruskal-Wallis test. These computations resulted in
a non-significant H for both proverbs and sentences
(proverbs: H(I)=.03; p< .87; sentences: H(I)=.OI; p< .92),
indicating the mean rank differences were not significantly
related to age.
Syntactic STS and Sex of Subject
Mean rank differences related to sex of the subject
were analyzed for both proverb and novel sentence lists
utilizing the Kruskal-Wallis test. These computations
resulted in a non-significant H for both proverbs and
43
1.00 .----r--.---r----r--,--.,.----,r----r--r--r----r--.---r---w
.90
.80
0--0 Group A (N= 10) 6
X----X Group B (N =10) I .70
6--6 Group C (N"IO)
I- ~I I
(.) , IJJ
.60 ,
a::: , a::: , 0 I (.) I
I Z .50
, 0 , , I- 7 I a:::
1 I 0 a. 1 : 0 .40 a::: 1 J a.
1J .30 1:
1/ 1/ I
.20
.10
oL-~-~-L-~--L-~~-~-~~~~-~-~~
I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15
SERIAL POSITION Figure 4. Proportion of syntactically correct responses
of sentences as a function of serial position by group.
44
novel sentences (proverbs: H(l)=l.l; P <.30; sentences:
H(1)=.04; p <.84) I suggesting that sex of the subject had
no significant effect upon syntactically correct STS
recall.
Syntactic STS and Years of College
The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to analyze mean
rank differences related to years of college completed for
both proverb and novel sentence lists. These computations
resulted in a non-significant H for both proverbs and
novel sentences (proverbs: H(2)=1.49; p < .48; sentences:
H(2)=2.87; p <.24) I suggesting that the mean rank
differences were not sufficient to conclude that years of
college significantly affected STS recall of syntac
tically correct information.
Conceptually Correct Recall
Free-recall responses by subjects which maintained
the meaning of the presented list item while changing
or eliminating one or two words were scored as concep-
tually correct recall responses. Estimated STS capacity
for conceptually correct recall was obtained from the
number of conceptually correct recall responses for the
last four input positions for each proverb and sentence
list. Mean STS estimates were obtained by summing across
all eight lists in each group. Separate analyses were
computed for the proverb lists group and the novel
sentence lists group.
Conceptual STS and Group Effects
45
The following analyses utilized conceptually
correct recall responses to determine the relationship
between STS recall capacity for conceptual information
and experimental sample group membership. Groups were
designated as Groups A, B, and C as described previously.
The Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance
by ranks technique was used to test the hypothesis that
the independent samples represented the same population.
One analysis employed the proverb lists group as
the dependent variable and the sampled groups as three
levels of the independent variable. This computation
resulted in a nonsignificant H (H(2)=4.95; P <.09). The
null hypothesis could not be rejected at the .05 level
of significance, suggesting that the mean rank difference
was not sufficient to conclude that the three groups
represented different populations. However, again it
should be noted that the mean ranks increased in a
nonsignificant linear fashion (Group A X=10.75; Group B
X=16.45; Group C X=19.30). This relationship is graphi
cally illustrated in Figure 5, serial positions 12 through
15.
46
1.00 ,---,---r---r-.----,r--,--r---r--r--...,r---,--or----r-
.90
.80
I' 'f 0 o Group A (N: 10) If
.70 x----x Group B (N: 10) I : 6--Il Group C (N =10) I I
I- I~ 0 If W .60 0:: If 0:: 0 I : 0 II z 0 .50 /1 l- Ii 0:: 0 /1 a.. 0 .40 /: 0:: a.. I:
/: X N
X '\ I· 'xy..Y~)( \ P\ /\ IJi
~-¥ '/\ L, X \6 \ II
.10 ' \ I
O--~_~~_~~~_L __ ~~ __ ~~~_L __ L-_L~
I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15
SERIAL POSITION
Figure 5. Proportion conceptually correct responses of proverbs by group.
47
A second analysis employed the novel sentence lists
group as the dependent variable and the sampled groups
as the three levels of the independent variable. This
computation resulted in a significant H (H(2)=6.59;
p <.04). In other words, if these observations were
drawn randomly from identically distributed populations,
mean ranks as discrepant as these would occur less than
5% of the time by chance (actually 4% or less chance).
The null hypothesis was rejected at an alpha level of .05
and it was concluded that the three groups represented
different populations. This relationship is graphically
illustrated as Figure 6.
Conceptual STS and Age of Subject
Mean rank differences related to age were analyzed
for both proverb and novel sentence lists utilizing the
Kruskal-Wallis test. These computations resulted in a
nonsignificant H for both proverbs and novel sentences
(proverbs: H(1)=.46; p <.50; sentences: H (1)=1.08;
p< .30), suggesting that the mean rank differences were
not sufficient to conclude that age effects on STS recall
of conceptual information were not significant.
48
1.00 r---'--'---r--~--'---.---r--"'---'r---"""'T"--.---r--""r-.....,
.80
0--0 Group A (N-IO)
.70 x----X Group B (N= 10)
A--ll Group C eN =10>
~ u I.LI Il::
.60
Il:: 0 U
Z .50 0 i= Il:: 0 0.. 0 a:: CL.
.30
.10
O~~-~-L-~--L_~~~-L_~ __ L-~ __ ~ __ ~~
I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15
SERIAL POSITION
Figure 6. Proportion conceptually correct responses of novel sentences by group.
49
conceptual STS and Sex of Subject
The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to analyze mean
rank differences related to sex of the subject for both
proverb and novel sentence lists. These computations
resulted in a nonsignificant H for both proverb and novel
sentence lists (proverbs: H(l)=O; p~ 1.00; sentences:
H(l)=.68; p <.41) I suggesting that sex effects on STS
recall for conceptual information were not significant.
conceptual STS and Years of College
Mean rank differences of STS conceptually correct
recall for both proverb and novel sentence lists were
analyzed relative to years of college completed by the
subject utilizing the Kruskal-Wallis test. These
computations resulted in a nonsignificant H for both
proverb and novel sentence lists (proverbs: H(2)=3.49;
p <.18; sentences: H(2)=3.11; P ~ .21) I suggesting that
the mean rank differences were not sufficient to conclude
that years of college completed significantly effected
conceptual STS recall capacity.
Discussion
The data analyses suggests that it was possible
to reject the null hypotheses only for conceptually
accurate recall responses of novel sentences. The mean
rank differences of conceptual recall of the skilled
interpreter group (Group C) for novel sentences was
significantly better (alpha level p ~ .04) than the non
signers with interest (Group A) and the non-signers
without interest (Group B). A summary of the mean rank
recall scores by groups is presented as Table 1.
Table 1. Recall by group.
Group
A B C
Source X* X* X* H P
50
Proverbs (syntax)
Sentences (syntax)
Proverbs (concept)
Sentences (concept)
12.10
11. 20
10.75
9.85
17.55
15.45
16.45
17.65
16.85
19.85
19.30
19.00
2.30
4.89
4.95
6/57
.315
.087
.084
.037
*mean ranks
Data analyses suggested no significant relationship
between age of subject and STS recall performance. A
summary of mean rank recall scores by age of subjects
is presented as Table 2.
51
Table 2. Recall scores by age of subject.
Age in Years
18-22 23-36
Source x* x* H p
Proverbs (syntax) 15.71 15.72 .029 .864
Sentences (syntax) 15.29 15.64 .011 .915
Proverbs (concept) 14.17 16.39 .464 .496
Sentences (concept) 13.50 16.83 1.077 .299
*mean ranks
Data analyses suggested no significant relation-
ship between sex of subject and mean rank STS recall score.
A summary of mean rank recall scores by sex of subject is
presented as Table 3.
Table 3. Recall scores by sex of subject.
Sex
Female Male
N=30 N=30 Source X* X* H P
Proverbs (syntax) 17.17 13.83 1. 094 .296
Sentences (syntax) 15.83 15.17 .044 .835
Proverbs (concept) 15.50 15.50 .000 1.00
Sentences (concept) 16.80 14.20 .682 .409
*mean ranks
52
Data analyses suggest no significant relationship
between years of college completed and mean rank STS
recall score. A summary of mean rank recall scores by
years of college completed is presented as Table 4.
Table 4. Recall scores by years of college completed.
Years of college
1-2 3-4 4
Source X* X* X* H P
Proverbs (syntax) 14.28 14.79 19.00 1. 484 .476
Sentences (syntax) 12.97 18.43 18.36 2.872 .238
Proverbs (concept) 13.31 15.29 20.71 3.490 .175
Sentences (concept) 13.13 16.57 19.86 3.112 .211
*mean ranks
CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Summary
The short term storage capacity for sentence-
type information was evaluated for three groups of subjects:
skilled interpreters, students interested in sign but with
limited knowledge of sign language, and students with no
interest in sign language. From the analyses of the study
samples, the following conclusions were made:
1. Skilled interpreters performed better on a
novel sentence conceptually correct STSrecall task than
subjects in the other two experimental samples.
2. Familiar sentence and syntactically correct
STS tasks did not differentiate skilleG interpreters from
the non-interpreter groups.
3. Age of subject, sex of subject, and years of
college completed by subject were not significantly
related to STS recall scores.
4. Interest in sign language, as defined in the
study, was not significantly related to STS recall score.
The finding of significant mean STS recall rank
differences on novel sentence tasks and not on familiar
53
54
sentence tasks would appear to support the hypothesis
that skilled interpreters are more efficient chunkers of
linguistic information than the other sample groups.
Familiar sentences (proverbs) are themselves efficient
chunks of information. Further grouping or chunking of
information may be extremely limited. Novel sentences,
however, are susceptible to further chunking, especially
on a semantic level. In other words, chunking efficiency
would be most important for stimuli which is not already
organized in a psycholinguistic chunk. Novel sentences
provide stimuli which probably do not hold preconceived
psycholinguistic significance to the listener and, thus,
depend upon the chunking abilities of the individual for
encoding/recall efficiency.
Although the interpreter group performed
statistically better only in the conceptually accurate
recall condition, overall interpreter performance appeared
superior to the other sample groups. Examination of the
summary table, Table 1, presented in Chapter 4, indicates
superior mean ranks of the interpreter group for both
syntactically and conceptually correct recall of novel
sentences and for conceptually correct recall of proverbs,
although this superiority was significant only for con-'
ceptual recall of novel sentences.
55
In a typical communication situation encountered
by the interpreter for the hearing impaired, spoken
English in the form of novel sentences must be retained
in memory storage long enough for retrieval of concep
tually correct ASL signs. Although syntactical infor
mation is sometimes requested by the hearing-impaired
consumer, conceptual accuracy is vital regardless of
whether the syntactic form is English or ASL. The
results of the study suggest that individuals who are
skilled interpreters are more efficient in short term
conceptually correct recall of novel information than the
other sample groups.
Although second language studies have suggested
that factors such as motivation and interest are important
in second language learning, the present study suggested
that interest in sign language alone was not related
to linguistic skill. Chunking efficiency, as reflected
in STS recall, as a linguistic skill was significantly
better for the skilled interpreters than for the
interest group with little or no sign language knowledge.
In the study, age of subject, sex of subject, and
years of college completed by subject were not signifi
cantly related to STS recall, although older subjects and
subjects with more years of college completed tended to
perform better on conceptual recall than the other groups.
This may be related to linguistic skill since the older
subjects were usually those with more years of college
completed. These differences were statistically non
significant, however.
Conclusions
The study suggests that skilled interpreters
perform extremely efficiently on a STS recall task for
novel information in the form of sentences. It is
assumed that this performance is related to linguistic
ability in the form of chunking efficiency. It is
therefore concluded that skilled interpreters are
efficient chunkers of information as measured by STS
recall involving novel sentences.
56
Further research must address specific issues
before such information can be utilized for screening and
evaluation of interpreter training program applicants. A
longitudinal study of interpreter trainees would be
beneficial in determining if interpreter chunking
efficiency is related to the interpreter training process
or if only interpreter trainees with efficient STS
chunking strategies are successful. Research is also
needed to further define skills and attributes of the
skilled interpreter. For example, what type of visual
perceptual skills, if any, distinguish the skilled
57
interpreter from other groups? Can skilled interpreters
be differentiated in terms of general language skills for
other groups? Do interpreter training programs train
skills or eliminate those not already possessing needed
skills? The future of research into the area of inter
preting for the hearing_ impaired and interpreting
training programs not only offers a wealth of areas for
investigation but also the promise of a clearer defi
nition and better understanding of what makes a skilled
interpreter.
APPENDIX A
PROVERB AND SENTENCE LISTS
58
List I-A.
Actions speak louder than words.
The exception proves the rule.
He travels fastest who travels alone.
A man's house is his castle.
Barking dogs seldom bite.
Gentle is that gentle does.
Di1cretion is the better part of valor.
Business before pleasure.
Make hay while the sun shines.
Many heads are better than one.
A poet is born not made.
No man can serve two masters.
Scratch my back and I'll scratch yours.
Take things as they come.
Waste makes want.
59
List 2-A.
No news is good news.
Marriages are made in heaven.
All that glitters is not gold.
Prevention is better than cure.
Experience is the best teacher.
A man can die but once.
Do as I say, not as I do.
Spare the rod and spoil the child.
Let the buyer beware.
An idle brain is the devil's workshop.
Beauty is only skin deep.
One today is worth two tomorrows.
After a storm comes a calm.
All is well that ends well.
Every cloud has a silver lining.
60
List 3-A.
If the shoe fits wear it.
All men are mortal.
Truth is stranger than fiction.
One master in a house is enough.
Every dog has his day.
A woman's work is never done.
Don't believe everything you hear.
Tomorrow is a new day.
One good turn deserves another.
Speech is silver, silence is golden.
Pride comes before a fall.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
Nothing succeeds like success.
One lie calls for many.
Beggars can't be choosers.
61
List 4-A.
Every oak has been an acorn.
A cat has nine lives.
Truth is stranger than fiction.
A little learning is a dangerous
One ill word asks another.
Handsome is that handsome does.
In doing we learn.
All truths are not to be told.
The first step is the hardest.
Keep something for a rainy day.
All's fair in love and war.
Better be sure than sorry.
Women are necessary evils.
Practice makes perfect.
Never mix your liquor.
62
thing.
List 5-A.
There is always something.
Better late than never.
The child is father to the man.
A drowning man will grab at straws.
Still waters run deep.
Where one doer shuts, another opens.
God helps those who help themselves.
Money begats money.
Hell is paved with good intentions.
Revenge is sweet.
A good example is the best sermon.
Love is blind.
Two wrongs don't make a right.
Imitation is the sincerest flattery.
Familiarity breeds contempt.
63
List 6-A.
April showers bring May flowers.
Birds of a feather flock together.
All rivers run to the sea.
Variety is the spice of life.
A close mouth catches no flies.
Haste makes waste.
Love makes the world go round.
The end justifies the means.
Honesty is the best policy.
Judge not that you are not judged.
Nature abhors a vacuum.
History repeats itself.
A fool and his money are soon parted.
Patience is a virtue.
A stitch in time saves nine.
64
List 7-A.
Easier said than done.
Virtue is her own reward.
A bad penny always returns.
Little strokes fell great oaks.
Honesty is the best policy.
Necessity is the mother of invention.
A rolling stone gathers no moss.
Blood is thicker than water.
The last straw breaks the camel's back.
Absence makes the heart grow fonder.
To err is human.
Love without end has no end.
Forbidden fruit is sweet.
A penny saved is a penny earned.
Dead men tell no tales.
65
List 8-A.
They die well that live well.
Every man has his price.
A friend in need is a friend indeed.
His bark is worse than his bite.
Don't change horses in midstream.
Let sleeping dogs lie.
There is an honour among thieves.
No smoke without some fire.
Affection blinds reason.
Many hands make light work.
Rome was not built in a day.
He laughs best who laughs last.
Boys will be boys.
There is no place like home.
You are as young as you feel.
66
List I-B.
Rules are necessary evils.
Better said than kept.
Man without friends has no patience.
Ignorance is the great fool.
The best today gathers the best tomorrow.
To run is forbidden.
Every penny is golden.
A deep love always lasts long.
April is better than May.
Mortal thieves serves no god.
Pride is the prevention of learning.
A man proven is a man believed.
Excuse my bark and I'll excuse yours.
Liquor is hell.
Valour is the hardest work.
67
List 2-B.
Contempt breeds itself.
Lie not, that you are not judged.
Man lets the time go round.
Handsome beggars make bad friends.
Bite of a dog speaks loudest.
A dangerous woman tells no lies.
Absence makes a friend.
Time is a day.
All races fit into the work.
Make hay while the sun shines.
Man's truth is never done.
Feather is the best insulation.
The sun and its gold are never parted.
The heart begats the master.
Price is only one consideration.
68
List 3-B.
Bad actions will flock to trouble.
Truth judge wrongs.
Heaven is earned with human virtue.
Valour is the hardest work.
Beauty is best.
Honesty deserves success.
Choosers make means meet.
When two beggars die, another succeeds.
Practice is good.
Don't make waves in midstream.
Words can't be stitches.
There is never nothing.
Better truth than fiction.
Smoke is beauty to the fir.
Eat what you grow.
69
List 4-B.
Some fruit is not to be eaten.
Better be light than rainy.
A poet has many distractions.
In running we grow.
Man is best in imitation and flattery.
Everything has been something.
All houses make April castles.
Mix something for a camel's back.
Idle is that does nothing.
One good war calls another.
A little waste is a bad thing.
Let bad blood fall.
He earns the most who comes alone.
He takes turns.
70
List 5-B.
Don't gather everything you have.
Absence is its own consent.
I am as ill as I look.
Good men are masters.
Rivers can be no sea.
If the door shuts, open it.
Good policy has its honesty.
Night is darker than day.
Nothing earns like money.
One invention makes for many.
A step in turn makes money.
One policy in a law is enough.
Two good tales make haste.
Oaks of the acorn save many birds.
Honesty deserves success.
71
List 6-B.
A straw can break but once.
Mothers are made in heaven.
All that bark are not dogs.
A little fly is the camel's reward.
Little strokes scratch deep.
No revenge is sweet revenge.
Water is thicker than a cloud.
News is the spice of the day.
Nature makes the moss grow stronger.
Every part is a little whole.
Let the day begin.
Live as you believe, not as you fear.
Love is but familiarity.
He treats himself.
72
List 7-B.
Soberness before drunkenness.
Flowers are the good part of showers.
Fiction makes spice.
Drowning cats always scratch.
Love helps itself.
Two places don't make Rome.
The mouth bites the man.
He is the devil's that evil does.
A boy's horse is his pleasure.
Grab history while the time travels.
Many sheep are better than one.
The necessary life is the best.
Honour is good lining.
No home can justify nine dogs.
A world is built not ruined.
73
List 8-B.
Dogs change more than masters.
Woman's discretion is stranger than man's contempt.
The child would be father.
They learn well that listen well.
All beware those who repeat themselves.
Hands are stronger than heads.
He dies well who dies last.
Many intentions blind idle men.
There are exceptions in heaven.
Ask the buyer but bring the money.
One house is worth two shops.
No silence without a vacuum.
There is no experience like business.
A man in love is a beggar indeed.
Some vanity has its virtue.
74
APPENDIX B
DATA COLLECTION FORM
75
Subject ID #
Age
Sex
Education
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
B
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
List lA 2A 3A 4A SA 6A 7A 8A IB 2B 3B 4B 5B 6B 7B BB
-...J 0'1
REFERENCES
Anderson, J. R., & paulson, A. Representation and retention of verbatim information. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1977, ~, 439-451.
Babbini, B., Montarelli, D., & Quigley, S. The component skills of interpreting as viewed by interpreters. Journal of Rehabilitation of the Deaf, 1974, 1, 20-27.
Battison, R. Lexical Borrowinq in American Sign Language. Silver Spring, Maryland: Linstok Press, 1978.
Bransford, J. D., & Johnson, M. K. Contextual prerequisites for understanding: Some investigations of comprehension and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1972, 11, 717-726.
Brodkey, D., & Shore, H. Student personality and success in an English program. Language Learning, 1976, ~, 153-159.
Brown, H. D. Cognitive and affective ~haracteristics of good language learners. In C. Henning (Ed.), Proceedings of the Los Angeles Second Language Research Forum. Los Angeles: University of California at Los Angeles, 1977.
Brown, H. D. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1980.
Caccamise, Frank (Ed.) Introduction to interpreting. Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf. Silver Spring, Maryland, 1980.
Caccamise, F., & Gustafson, G. (Eds.) Manual/simulaneous communication instructional programs in the educational setting. Washington, D. C.: Gallaudet College Press, 1979.
Chomsky, N. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press, 1965.
77
Craik, F. I. M. Two components in free recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1968, 2, 996-1004.
78
Craik, F. I. M. The fate of primary memory items in free recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1970, ~, 143-148.
Craik, F. I. M., & Levy, B. A. Semantic and acoustic information in primary memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970, 86, 77-82.
Craik, F. I. M., & Tulving, E. Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1975, 104, 268-294.
Ey senck , M. W. ~H:..::u:::m,,-,a;::n:-:::M:..:.e.::.m=o-=r~y....::=---....:T::..:h==e=o-=r~y,-!,~R;.:.;e::.;s=-e=-=a.::.r..=c:..:.h:.,:,:........,:a:;,:n;.:.;d:;;: Individual Differences. New York: Pergamon Press, 1977.
Frishberg, N. The case of the missing length. Communication and Cognition, 1978, 11, 57-67.
Gardner, R., & Lambert, W. E. Attitudes and Motivation in Second Language Learning. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House Publishers, 1972.
Glanzer, M., Gianutsos, R., & Dubin, S. The removal of items from short-term storage. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1969, ~, 435-447.
Grosjean, F. The perception of rate in spoken language and sign languages. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 1977, ~, 408-413.
Guiora, A. Z., Brannon, R. C. L., & Dull, C. Y. Empathy and second language learning. Language Learning, 1972, 22, 111-130.
Herriott, P. Attributes of Memory. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd., 1974.
Jarvella, R. J. Syntactic processing of connected speech. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1971, lQ, 409-416.
79 Johnson, N. F. Sequential verbal behavior. In T. R.
Dixon & D. L. Horton (Eds.), Verbal Behavior and General Behavior Theory. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1968.
Johnson, N. F. The role of chunking and organization in the process of recall. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation: Advances in Research and Theory, Vol. 4. New York: Academic Press, 1970.
Klima, E. S., & Bellugi, U. The Signs of Language. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1979.
Lewis, M. Q. Short-term memory items in repeated free recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1971, lQ, 190-193.
Marslen-Wilson, W. Sentence perception as an interactive parallel process. Science, 1975, 189, 226-228.
Miller, G. A. What is information measurement? American Psychologist, 1953, ~, 3-11.
Miller, G. A. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 1956, &1, 81-96.
Miller, G. A., & Chomsky, N. Finitary model of language users. In R. D. Luce, R. R. Bush, & E. Galantes (Eds.), Handbook of Mathematical Psychology, Vol. II.
New York: Wiley, 1963, 419-492.
Mowl, G. E. Predicting achievement in reading fingerspelling: Development of an experimental test. Journal of Rehabilitation of the Deaf, 1981, ~, 7-9.
Murdock, B. B. The immediate retention of unrelated words. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1960, 60, 222-234.
Murdock, B. B. Short-term memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation: Advances in Research and Theory, Vol. 5. London: Academic Press, 1972.
80
Murdock, B. B. Human Memory: Theory and Data. Potomac, Md.: Laurence Erlbaum Associates, 1974.
Naiman, N., Frohlich, M., & Stern, H. The Good Language Learner. Toronto: Ontario Institutes for Studies in Education, 1975.
Poizner, H., & Lane, H. Cerebral asymmetry in the perception of American Sign Language. Brain and Language, 1979, 2, 210-226.
Raymond, B. Short-term storage and long-term storage in free recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1969, ~, 567-574.
Ross, P., Pergament, L., & Anisfeld, M. Cerebral lateralization of deaf and hearing individuals for linguistic comparison judgments. Brain and Language, 1979, ~, 69-80.
Savin, H. B., & Perchonock, E. Grammatical structure and the immediate recall of English sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1965, i, 348-353.
Schein, J. D., & Delk, M. T. The Deaf Population of the United States. Silver Spring, Md.: National Association of the Deaf, 1974.
Simon, H. A. How big is a chunk? Science, 1974, 183, 482-488.
Siple, P., Hatfield, N., & Caccamise, F. The role of visual perceptual abilities in the acquisition and comprehension of sign language. American Annals of the Deaf, 1978, 123, 852-856.
Snow, C. E., & Hoefnage1-Hohle, M. Individual differences in second language abilities: A factor-analysis study. Language and Speech, 1979, ~, 151-162.
Stokoe, W. Sign Language Structure: The First Linguistic Analysis of American Sign Language. Silver Spring, Md.: National Association of the Deaf, 1978.
81
Treisman, A. M. The effect of irrelevant material on the efficiency of selective listening. American Journal of Psychology, 1964, 77, 533-546.
Tulving, E., & Bower, G. H. The logic of memory representations. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Vol. 8. London: Academic Press, 1974.
Tulving, E., & Colotla, V. Free recall of trilingual lists. Cognitive Psychology, 1970, 1, 86-98.
Tulving, E., & Patterson, R. D. Functional units and retrieval processes in free recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1968, 11, 239-248.
Waugh, N. C., & Norman, D. A. Primary memory. Psychological Review, 1965, 72, 89-104.
Wetherick, N. E. The role of semantic information in short-term memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1975, 14, 471-480.
Woodward, J. Interrule implication in American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies, 1973, i, 37-46.
