TRANSPOSITION IN KINDERGARTEN CHILDREN AS A FUNCTION OF OVERTRAINING AND TEST CONDITION

TAKESHI SUGIMURA

doi:10.4992/psycholres1954.13.11

TAKESHI SUGIMURA

著者情報

ジャーナルフリー

1971 年 13 巻 1 号 p. 11-18

DOI https://doi.org/10.4992/psycholres1954.13.11

詳細

Published: 1971 Received: 1971/01/21 Available on J-STAGE: 2009/02/24 Accepted: - Advance online publication: - Revised: -
訂正情報
訂正日: 2009/02/24 訂正理由: - 訂正箇所: 論文抄録訂正内容: Wrong : In Experiment I kindergarten children were trained on a two-stimulus problem to a criterion of 5 successive correct, 10 successive correct, or 10 plus 20 correct responses. In Experiment II the Ss were trained on an intermediate-size problem to a criterion of 5 successive correct or 10 plus 20 correct responses. They were then given a Near (1 step) or a Far (4 steps) transposition test. In the two-stimulus problem transposition increased gradually with amounts of overtraining but there was no distance effect. In the intermediate-size problem transposition increased after overtraining but decreased on the Far test, and the distance effect became insignificant after overtraining. The increment of transposition by overtraining is in line with the present hypothesis and supports the idea that overtraining facilitates to learn the relative concept of the stimulus properties. It may be concluded that the training level is an important determinant in the transposition behavior and that the distance effect occurs more evidently in the intermediate-size problem than in the two-stimulus problem.
Right : In Experiment I kindergarten children were trained on a two-stimulus problem to a criterion of 5 successive correct, 10 successive correct, or 10 plus 20 correct responses. In Experiment II the Ss were trained on an intermediate-size problem to a criterion of 5 successive correct or 10 plus 20 correct responses. They were then given a Near (1 step) or a Far (4 steps) transposition test. In the two-stimulus problem transposition increased gradually with amounts of overtraining but there was no distance effect. In the intermediate-size problem transposition increased after overtraining but decreased on the Far test, and the distance effect became insignificant after overtraining. The increment of transposition by overtraining is in line with the present hypothesis and supports the idea that overtraining facilitates to learn the relative concept of the stimulus properties. It may be concluded that the training level is an important determinant in the transposition behavior and that the distance effect occurs more evidently in the intermediate-size problem than in the twostimulus problem.

訂正日: 2009/02/24 訂正理由: - 訂正箇所: 引用文献情報訂正内容: Wrong : ALBERTS, E., & EHRENFREUNIJ, D. 1951 Transposition in children as a function of age. J. exp. Psychol., 41, 30-38.
BEATY, W. E., & WEIR, M. W. 1966 Children's performance on the intermediate-size transposition problem as a function of two different training procedures., J. exp. Child Psychol., 4, 332-340.
GONZALEZ, R. C., & Ross, S. 1958 The basis of solution by preverbal children of the intermediate-size problem. Amer., J. Psychol., 71, 742-746.
HANSEN, B., & COLE, M. 1968 Discriminability and transposition on the intermediate-size problem. J. exp. Child Psychol., 6, 174-180.
HEBERT, J. A., & KRANTZ, D. L. 1965 Transposition: A reevaluation. Psychol. Bull., 65, 244-257.
IWAHARA, S., & SUGIMURA, T. 1958 Studies on shifts of discrimination learning: I. The number of trials during prior learning. Jap. J. educ. Psychol., 6, 106-112. (In Japanese with an English abstract).
JACKSON, T. A., & JEROME, E. A. 1943 Studies in the transposition of learning by children: V. Simultaneous vs. successive presentation of the stimuli to bright and dull children. J. exp. Psychol., 33, 431-439.
JACKSON, T. A., STONEX, E., LANE, E., & DOMINCUEZ, K. 1938 Studies in the transposition of learning by children: I. Relative vs. absolute response as a function of amount of training. J. exp. Psychol., 23, 578-600.
JOHNSON, R. C., & ZARA, R. C. 1960 Relational learning in young children. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 53, 594-597.
KUENNE, M. R. 1946 Experimental investigation of the relation of language to transposition behavior in young children., J, exp. Psychol., 36, 471-490.
LOVEJOY, E. 1966 Analysis of the overlearning reversal effect. Psychol. Rev., 73, 87-103.
MACKINTOSH, N. J. 1965 Selective attention in animal discrimination learning. Psychol. Bull., 64, 124-150.
OSEN, L., & COLE, M. 1967 Transposition as a function of withinpair differences. Psychon. Sri., 8, 545-546.
REESE, H. W. 1961 Transposition in the intermediate-size problem by preschool children. Child Develpm., 32, 311-314.
REESE, H. W. 1962 The distance effect in transposition in the intermediate size problem., J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 55, 528-531.
REESE, H. W. 1966 Verbal effects in the intermediate-size transposition problem. J. exp. Child Psychol., 3, 123-130.
REESE, H. W., & FIERO, P. G. 1964 Overlearning and transposition. Child Develpm., 35, 1361-1365.
RILEY, D. A. 1968 Discrimination learning. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
STEVENSON, H. W., & BITTERMAN, M. E. 1955 The distance-effect in the transposition of intermediate size by children. Amer. J. Psyhol., 68, 274-279.
STEVENSON, H. W., & IscoE, 1. 1954 Overtraining and transposition in children., J. exp. Psychol., 47, 251-255.
STEVENSON, H. W., & LANGFORD, T. 1957 Time as a variable in transposition by children. Child Develpm., 28, 365-370.
SUGIMURA, T. 1967 The role of overtraining in human discrimination learning. Bull. Nara Univ. of Educ., 15, 147-168. (In Japanese with an English abstract).
SUGIMUSA, T. 1968 The role of overtraining in human discrimination learning (2) Bull. Nara Univ. of Educ., 16, 171-193. (In Japanese with an English abstract).
WOLFF, J. L. 1967 Concept-shift and discrimination-reversal in humans. Psychol. Bull., 68, 369-408.
ZEAMAN, D., & HousE, B. J. 1963 The role of attention in retardate discrimination learning. In N. R. Ellis (Ed.), Handbook of mental deficiency: Psychological theory and research. New York: McGraw-Hill, Pp. 159-223.
ZEILER, M. D. 1963 The ratio theory of intermediate size discrimination. Psychol. Rev., 70, 516-533.
ZEILER, M. D. 1966a Solution of the two-stimulus transposition problem by fourand five-year-old children. J. exp. Psychol., 71, 576-579.
ZEILER, M. D. 1966b The stimulus in the intermediate size problem. Psychol. Rev., 73, 257-261.
ZEILER, M. D., & GARDNER, A. M. 1966 Intermediate size discrimination in seven- and eightyearold children., J. exp. Psychol., 71, 203-207.

Right : ALBERTS, E., & EHRENFREUND, D. 1951 Transposition in children as a function of age. J. exp. Psychol., 41, 30-38.
BEATY, W. E., & WEIR, M. W. 1966 Children's performance on the intermediate-size transposition problem as a function of two different training procedures. J. exp. Child Psychol., 4, 332-340.
GONZALEZ, R. C., & Ross, S. 1958 The basis of solution by preverbal children of the intermediate-size problem. Amer. J. Psychol., 71, 742-746.
HANSEN, B., & COLE, M. 1968 Discriminability and transposition on the intermediate-size problem. J. exp. Child Psychol., 6, 174-180.
HEBERT, J. A., & KRANTZ, D. L. 1965 Transposition: A reevaluation. Psychol. Bull., 65, 244-257.
IWAHARA, S., & SUGIMURA, T. 1958 Studies on shifts of discrimination learning: I. The number of trials during prior learning. Jap. J. educ. Psychol., 6, 106-112. (In Japanese with an English abstract).
JACKSON, T. A., & JEROME, E. A. 1943 Studies in the transposition of learning by children: V. Simultaneous vs. successive presentation of the stimuli to bright and dull children. J. exp. Psychol., 33, 431-439.
JACKSON, T. A., STONEX, E., LANE, E, & DOMINGUEZ, K. 1938 Studies in the transposition of learning by children: I. Relative vs. absolute response as a function of amount of training. J. exp. Psychol., 23, 578-600.
JOHNSON, R. C., & ZARA, R. C. 1960 Relational learning in young children. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 53, 594-597.
KUENNE, M. R. 1946 Experimental investigation of the relation of language to transposition behavior in young children. J. exp. Psychol., 36, 471-490.
LOVEJOY, E. 1966 Analysis of the overlearning reversal effect. Psychol. Rev., 73, 87-103.
MACKINTOSH, N. J. 1965 Selective attention in animal discrimination learning. Psychol. Bull., 64, 124-150.
OSEN, L., & COLE, M. 1967 Transposition as a function of within-pair differences. Psychon. Sci., 8, 545-546.
REESE, H. W. 1961 Transposition in the inter-mediate-size problem by preschool children. Child Develpm., 32, 311-314.
REESE, H. W. 1962 The distance effect in transposition in the intermediate size problem. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 55, 528-531.
REESE, H. W.1966 Verbal effects in the inter-mediate-size transposition problem. J. exp. Child Psychol., 3, 123-130.
REESE, H. W., & FIERO, P. G. 1964 Overlearning and transposition. Child Develpm., 35, 1361-1365.
RILEY, D. A. 1968 Discrimination learning. Bos-ton: Allyn & Bacon.
STEVENSON, H. W., & BITTERMAN, M. E. 1955 The distance-effect in the transposition of intermediate size by children. Amer. J. Psyhol., 68, 274-279.
STEVENSON, H. W., & ISCOE, I. 1954 Overtraining and transposition in children. J. exp. Psychol., 47, 251-255.
STEVENSON, H. W., & LANGFORD, T. 1957 Time as a variable in transposition by children. Child Develpm., 28, 365-370.
SUGIMURA, T. 1967 The role of overtraining in human discrimination learning. Bull. Nara Univ. of Educ., 15, 147-168. (In Japanese with an English abstract).
SUGIMURA, T. 1968 The role of overtraining in human discrimination learning (2) Bull. Nara Univ. of Educ., 16, 171-193. (In Japanese with an English abstract).
WOLFF, J. L. 1967 Concept-shift and discrimina-tion-reversal in humans. Psychol. Bull., 68, 369-408.
ZEAMAN, D., & HOUSE, B. J. 1963 The role of attention in retardate discrimination learning. In N. R. Ellis (Ed.), Handbook of mental deficiency: Psychological theory and research. New York: McGraw-Hill, Pp.159-223.
ZEILER, M. D. 1963 The ratio theory of inter-mediate size discrimination. Psychol. Rev., 70, 516-533.
ZEILER, M. D. 1966a Solution of the two-stimulus transposition problem by four- and fivc-year-old children. J. exp. psychol., 71, 576-579.
ZEILER, M. D. 1966b The stimulus in the intermediate size problem. Psychol. Rev., 73, 257-261.
ZEILER, M. D., & GARDNER, A. M. 1966 Intermediate size discrimination in seven- and eight-year-old children. J. exp. Psychol., 71, 203-207.

訂正日: 2009/02/24 訂正理由: - 訂正箇所: PDFファイル訂正内容: -

訂正日: 2009/02/24 訂正理由: - 訂正箇所: 論文抄録訂正内容: Wrong : In Experiment I kindergarten children were trained on a two-stimulus problem to a criterion of 5 successive correct, 10 successive correct, or 10 plus 20 correct responses. In Experiment II the Ss were trained on an intermediate-size problem to a criterion of 5 successive correct or 10 plus 20 correct responses. They were then given a Near (1 step) or a Far (4 steps) transposition test. In the two-stimulus problem transposition increased gradually with amounts of overtraining but there was no distance effect. In the intermediate-size problem transposition increased after overtraining but decreased on the Far test, and the distance effect became insignificant after overtraining. The increment of transposition by overtraining is in line with the present hypothesis and supports the idea that overtraining facilitates to learn the relative concept of the stimulus properties. It may be concluded that the training level is an important determinant in the transposition behavior and that the distance effect occurs more evidently in the intermediate-size problem than in the twostimulus problem.
Right : In Experiment I kindergarten children were trained on a two-stimulus problem to a criterion of 5 successive correct, 10 successive correct, or 10 plus 20 correct, responses. In Experiment II the Ss were trained on an intermediate-size problem to a criterion of 5 successive correct or 10 plus 20 correct responses. They were then given a Near (1 step) or a Far (4 steps) transposition test. In the two-stimulus problem transposition increased gradually with amounts of over-training but there was no distance effect. In the intermediate-size problem transposition increased after overtraining but decreased on the Far test, and the distance effect became insignificant after overtraining. The increment of transposition by overtraining is in line with the present hypothesis and supports the idea that overtraining facilitates to learn the relative concept of the stimulus properties. It may be concluded that the training level is an important determinant in the transposition behavior and that the distance effect occurs more evidently in the intermediate-size problem than in the two-stimulus problem.

訂正日: 2009/02/24 訂正理由: - 訂正箇所: 引用文献情報訂正内容: Wrong : ALBERTS, E., & EHRENFREUND, D. 1951 Transposition in children as a function of age. J. exp. Psychol., 41, 30-38.
BEATY, W. E., & WEIR, M. W. 1966 Children's performance on the intermediate-size transposition problem as a function of two different training procedures. J. exp. Child Psychol., 4, 332-340.
GONZALEZ, R. C., & Ross, S. 1958 The basis of solution by preverbal children of the intermediate-size problem. Amer. J. Psychol., 71, 742-746.
HANSEN, B., & COLE, M. 1968 Discriminability and transposition on the intermediate-size problem. J. exp. Child Psychol., 6, 174-180.
HEBERT, J. A., & KRANTZ, D. L. 1965 Transposition: A reevaluation. Psychol. Bull., 65, 244-257.
IWAHARA, S., & SUGIMURA, T. 1958 Studies on shifts of discrimination learning: I. The number of trials during prior learning. Jap. J. educ. Psychol., 6, 106-112. (In Japanese with an English abstract).
JACKSON, T. A., & JEROME, E. A. 1943 Studies in the transposition of learning by children: V. Simultaneous vs. successive presentation of the stimuli to bright and dull children. J. exp. Psychol., 33, 431-439.
JACKSON, T. A., STONEX, E., LANE, E, & DOMINGUEZ, K. 1938 Studies in the transposition of learning by children: I. Relative vs. absolute response as a function of amount of training. J. exp. Psychol., 23, 578-600.
JOHNSON, R. C., & ZARA, R. C. 1960 Relational learning in young children. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 53, 594-597.
KUENNE, M. R. 1946 Experimental investigation of the relation of language to transposition behavior in young children. J. exp. Psychol., 36, 471-490.
LOVEJOY, E. 1966 Analysis of the overlearning reversal effect. Psychol. Rev., 73, 87-103.
MACKINTOSH, N. J. 1965 Selective attention in animal discrimination learning. Psychol. Bull., 64, 124-150.
OSEN, L., & COLE, M. 1967 Transposition as a function of within-pair differences. Psychon. Sci., 8, 545-546.
REESE, H. W. 1961 Transposition in the inter-mediate-size problem by preschool children. Child Develpm., 32, 311-314.
REESE, H. W. 1962 The distance effect in transposition in the intermediate size problem. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 55, 528-531.
REESE, H. W.1966 Verbal effects in the inter-mediate-size transposition problem. J. exp. Child Psychol., 3, 123-130.
REESE, H. W., & FIERO, P. G. 1964 Overlearning and transposition. Child Develpm., 35, 1361-1365.
RILEY, D. A. 1968 Discrimination learning. Bos-ton: Allyn & Bacon.
STEVENSON, H. W., & BITTERMAN, M. E. 1955 The distance-effect in the transposition of intermediate size by children. Amer. J. Psyhol., 68, 274-279.
STEVENSON, H. W., & ISCOE, I. 1954 Overtraining and transposition in children. J. exp. Psychol., 47, 251-255.
STEVENSON, H. W., & LANGFORD, T. 1957 Time as a variable in transposition by children. Child Develpm., 28, 365-370.
SUGIMURA, T. 1967 The role of overtraining in human discrimination learning. Bull. Nara Univ. of Educ., 15, 147-168. (In Japanese with an English abstract).
SUGIMURA, T. 1968 The role of overtraining in human discrimination learning (2) Bull. Nara Univ. of Educ., 16, 171-193. (In Japanese with an English abstract).
WOLFF, J. L. 1967 Concept-shift and discrimina-tion-reversal in humans. Psychol. Bull., 68, 369-408.
ZEAMAN, D., & HOUSE, B. J. 1963 The role of attention in retardate discrimination learning. In N. R. Ellis (Ed.), Handbook of mental deficiency: Psychological theory and research. New York: McGraw-Hill, Pp.159-223.
ZEILER, M. D. 1963 The ratio theory of inter-mediate size discrimination. Psychol. Rev., 70, 516-533.
ZEILER, M. D. 1966a Solution of the two-stimulus transposition problem by four- and fivc-year-old children. J. exp. psychol., 71, 576-579.
ZEILER, M. D. 1966b The stimulus in the intermediate size problem. Psychol. Rev., 73, 257-261.
ZEILER, M. D., & GARDNER, A. M. 1966 Intermediate size discrimination in seven- and eight-year-old children. J. exp. Psychol., 71, 203-207.

Right : ALBERTS, E., & EHRENFREUND, D. 1951 Transposition in children as a function of age. J. exp. Psychol., 41, 30-38.
BEATY, W. E., & WEIR, M. W. 1966 Children's performance on the intermediate-size transposition problem as a function of two different training procedures. J. exp. Child Psychol., 4, 332-340.
GONZALEZ, R. C., & ROSS, S. 1958 The basis of solution by preverbal children of the intermediate-size problem. Amer. J. Psychol., 71, 742-746.
HANSEN, B., & COLE, M. 1968 Discriminability and transposition on the intermediate-size problem. J. exp. Child Psychol., 6, 174-180.
HEBERT, J. A., & KRANTZ, D. L. 1965 Transposition: A reevaluation. Psychol. Bull., 65, 244-257.
IWAHARA, S., & SUGIMURA, T. 1958 Studies on shifts of discrimination learning: I. The number of trials during prior learning. Jap. J. educ. Psychol., 6, 106-112. (In Japanese with an English abstract).
JACKSON, T. A., & JEROME, E. A. 1943 Studies in the transposition of learning by children: V. Simultaneous vs. successive presentation of the stimuli to bright and dull children. J. exp. Psychol., 33, 431-439.
JACKSON, T. A., STONEX, E., LANE, E., & DOMINGUEZ, K. 1938 Studies in the transposition of learning by children: I. Relative vs. absolute response as a function of amount of training. J. exp. Psychol., 23, 578-600.
JOHNSON, R. C., & ZARA, R. C. 1960 Relational learning in young children. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 53, 594-597.
KUENNE, M. R. 1946 Experimental investigation of the relation of language to transposition behavior in young children. J. exp. Psychol., 36, 471-490.
LOVEJOY, E. 1966 Analysis of the overlearning reversal effect. Psychol. Rev., 73, 87-103.
MACKINTOSH, N. J. 1965 Selective attention in animal discrimination learning. Psychol. Bull., 64, 124-150.
OSEN, L., & COLE, M. 1967 Transposition as a function of within-pair differences. Psychon. Sci., 8, 545-546.
REESE, H. W. 1961 Transposition in the intermediate-size problem by preschool children. Child Develpm., 32, 311-314.
REESE, H. W. 1962 The distance effect in transposition in the intermediate size problem. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 55, 528-531.
REESE, H. W. 1966 Verbal effects in the intermediate-size transposition problem. J. exp. Child Psychol., 3, 123-130.
REESE, H. W., & FIERO, P. G. 1964 Overlearning and transposition. Child Develpm., 35, 1361-1365.
RILEY, D. A. 1968 Discrimination learning. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
STEVENSON, H. W., & BITTERMAN, M. E. 1955 The distance-effect in the transposition of intermediate size by children. Amer. J. Psyhol., 68, 274-279.
STEVENSON, H. W., & ISCOE, I. 1954 Overtraining and transposition in children. J. exp. Psychol., 47, 251-255.
STEVENSON, H. W., & LANGFORD, T. 1957 Time as a variable in transposition by children. Child Develpm., 28, 365-370.
SUGIMURA, T. 1967 The role of overtraining in human discrimination learning. Bull. Nara Univ. of Educ., 15, 147-168. (In Japanese with an English abstract).
SUGIMURA, T. 1968 The role of overtraining in human discrimination learning (2) Bull. Nara Univ. of Educ., 16, 171-193. (In Japanese with an English abstract).
WOLFF, J. L. 1967 Concept-shift and discrimination-reversal in humans. Psychol. Bull., 68, 369-408.
ZEAMAN, D., & HOUSE, B. J. 1963 The role of attention in retardate discrimination learning. In N. R. Ellis (Ed.), Handbook of mental deficiency: Psychological theory and research. New York: McGraw-Hill, Pp.159-223.
ZEILER, M. D. 1963 The ratio theory of inter-mediate size discrimination. Psychol. Rev., 70, 516-533.
ZEILER, M. D. 1966a Solution of the two-stimulus transposition problem by four-and five-year-old children. J. exp. Psychol., 71, 576-579.
ZEILER, M. D. 1966b The stimulus in the intermediate size problem. Psychol. Rev., 73, 257-261.
ZEILER, M. D., & GARDNER, A. M. 1966 Intermediate size discrimination in seven-and eight-year-old children. J. exp. Psychol., 71, 203-207.

抄録

In Experiment I kindergarten children were trained on a two-stimulus problem to a criterion of 5 successive correct, 10 successive correct, or 10 plus 20 correct, responses. In Experiment II the Ss were trained on an intermediate-size problem to a criterion of 5 successive correct or 10 plus 20 correct responses. They were then given a Near (1 step) or a Far (4 steps) transposition test. In the two-stimulus problem transposition increased gradually with amounts of over-training but there was no distance effect. In the intermediate-size problem transposition increased after overtraining but decreased on the Far test, and the distance effect became insignificant after overtraining. The increment of transposition by overtraining is in line with the present hypothesis and supports the idea that overtraining facilitates to learn the relative concept of the stimulus properties. It may be concluded that the training level is an important determinant in the transposition behavior and that the distance effect occurs more evidently in the intermediate-size problem than in the two-stimulus problem.

責任著者(Corresponding author)

訂正情報

J-STAGEへの登録はこちら（無料）