No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

The modelling of strictly sequential experimental tasks, such as serial list learning, has underscored a potential problem for connectionism: namely, the inability of connectionist networks to retain old information during the acquisition of new material (McCloskey & Cohen, 1989; Ratcliff, 1990). While humans also suffer from interference, connectionist networks experience a much greater loss of old material; this excessive retroactive interference is termed the sequential learning problem. This paper reviews two papers arguing that connectionist networks are unable to overcome the sequential learning problem, and five papers offering potential solutions. Simulations exploring issues arising from these reviews are described in the later part of the paper. It is true that connectionist models do suffer from the sequential learning problem. However, it appears that the problem is found only with simulations employing a strictly sequential training regime and involving small, unstructured item sets. Hence, there is no reason to believe that more realistic simulations of large, structured domains, such as language, will suffer from the sequential learning problem.

The purpose of this study was to investigate differences among the dominant modalities displayed by kindergarten students, relationships between dominant modality and gender, and interactions between dominant modality and academic achievement.A total of 60 males and 60 females participated in this study. Subjects were randomly selected from 137 kindergarten students whose parents granted written permission for inclusion in the study. At the time of testing, subjects ranged in age from five years, seven months to seven years.During a three-week period of time, examiners administered the Swassing-Barbe Modality Index (SBMI) followed by the Skills Cluster of the Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery, to all subjects. Instruments were administered to each subject individually during two separate testing sessions.Subjects were divided into modality groups on the basis of SBMI modality percentage scores and modality raw scores. The .05 level of confidence was established for testing statistical significance with each of the eight null hypotheses.The predominant learning modality for kindergarten students was found to be audition, followed by vision and kinesthesia. The proportion of children identified as having a mixed modality strength was consistent with the proportion for the general population suggesting that integration of learning modalities may occur at an earlier age than that indicated by previous research.Essentially no relationship was found between dominant learning modality and sex, or between ability to function within each modality (visual, auditory, kinesthetic) and sex.No significant differences were found among average achievement scores for visual, auditory, kinesthetic, and mixed dominance modality groups indicating significant relationship between a child's identified dominant learning modality and achievement. However, results did indicate significant relationships between ability to function within the dominant modality and achievement for children identified as having-either a visual or an auditory modality dominance. A significant relationship was also found between ability to utilize all learning modalities and achievement. These findings suggest that the ability to function within the dominant modality and the ability to utilize all learning modalities may significantly affect the acquisition of academic skills.

Typescript. / Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hawaii, 1967. / Bibliography: leaves [100]-105. / vii, 105 l tables

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Indiana University, 1966. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves [64-66]). Also issued in print.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--West Virginia University, 1998. / Title from document title page. Document formatted into pages; contains vii, 108 p. : ill. Includes abstract. Includes bibliographical references (p. 87-93).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Johns Hopkins University, 1940. / Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Bibliography: p. 53-56.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Columbia University, 1933. / Vita. Published also as Archives of psychology, no. 143. Bibliography: p. 55.