Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Kulhavy, R.W."
  1. Verdi, M.P.; Kulhavy, R.W.; Stock, W.A.; Rittscho, K.A.; Savenye, W.: Why maps improve memory for text : the influence of structural information on working-memory operations (1993) 0.10
    0.09561041 = product of:
      0.19122082 = sum of:
        0.19122082 = sum of:
          0.1500228 = weight(_text_:maps in 2090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.1500228 = score(doc=2090,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.28477904 = queryWeight, product of:
                5.619245 = idf(docFreq=435, maxDocs=44218)
                0.050679237 = queryNorm
              0.5268042 = fieldWeight in 2090, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                5.619245 = idf(docFreq=435, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2090)
          0.041198023 = weight(_text_:22 in 2090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.041198023 = score(doc=2090,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17747006 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.050679237 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2090, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2090)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    In order to test how associated verbal and spatial stimuli are processed in memory, undergraduates studied a reference map as either an intact unit or as a series of individual features, and read a text containing facts related to map features. In Addition, the map was presented either before or after reading the text. Seeing the intact map prior to the text led to better recall of both map information and facts from the text. These results support a dual coding modell, where stimuli such as maps possess a retrieval advantage because they allow simultaneous representation in working memory. This advantage occurs because information from the map can be used to cue retrieval of associated verbal facts, without exceeding the processing constraints of the memorial system
    Date
    22. 7.2000 19:18:18
  2. Stock, W.A.; Kulhavy, R.W.; Peterson, S.E.; Hancock, T.E.; Verdi, M.P.: Mental representations of maps and verbal descriptions : evidence they may affect text memory differently (1995) 0.04
    0.043756653 = product of:
      0.087513305 = sum of:
        0.087513305 = product of:
          0.17502661 = sum of:
            0.17502661 = weight(_text_:maps in 2088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.17502661 = score(doc=2088,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.28477904 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.619245 = idf(docFreq=435, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050679237 = queryNorm
                0.61460495 = fieldWeight in 2088, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  5.619245 = idf(docFreq=435, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2088)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    2 studies examined the effect that mental representations derived from maps and verbal descriptions have on the recall of facts from a text. In experiment 1, subjects studies a map of Tasmania, a control map of Ceylon, or comparable verbal descriptions and then listened to a text containing facts about Tasmania. Fact recall was higher and map drawings were more accurate for the group that studied the Tasmania map. In experiment 2, subject studied a map of Tasmania, or one of two verbal descriptions (using different sequences of landmarks) of Tasmania. The results replicated those of experiment 1. These findings suggest that there may be fundamental differences between visual and verbal representations of the same space
  3. Rittschof, K.A.; Kulhavy, R.W.; Stock, W.A.; Verdi, M.P.; Doran, J.M.: Thematic maps improve memory for facts and inferences : a test of the stimulus order hypothesis (1994) 0.04
    0.0375057 = product of:
      0.0750114 = sum of:
        0.0750114 = product of:
          0.1500228 = sum of:
            0.1500228 = weight(_text_:maps in 2089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.1500228 = score(doc=2089,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.28477904 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.619245 = idf(docFreq=435, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050679237 = queryNorm
                0.5268042 = fieldWeight in 2089, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  5.619245 = idf(docFreq=435, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2089)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Undergraduates studied a thematic map of colonial Ceylon and read an expository text containing facts related to, or not related to, the map theme. Stimulus order (map-text vs. text-map) was varied between subjects, and half of the learners in each stimulus order group received a verbal prime related to the map theme. Subjects in the map-first condition recalled more theme related and unrelated text facts and made more correct inferences involving the theme displayed on the map. Verbal primimng had no effect on memory the theme-related facts or inferences, but reduced recall of unrelated facts. These results were interpreted within the dual coding framework, where maps are encoded as structurally coherent images. Such images are computationally efficient and can be used to retrieve associated text facts and to make the comparative judgements required for inferencing
  4. Woodard, K.A.; Kulhavy, R.W.; Stock, W.A.; Haygood, R.C.: Comparing elaboration and dual coding theories : the case of maps and text (1993) 0.04
    0.035360713 = product of:
      0.070721425 = sum of:
        0.070721425 = product of:
          0.14144285 = sum of:
            0.14144285 = weight(_text_:maps in 2091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.14144285 = score(doc=2091,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.28477904 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.619245 = idf(docFreq=435, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050679237 = queryNorm
                0.4966758 = fieldWeight in 2091, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.619245 = idf(docFreq=435, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2091)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)