Maze units retain near-complete control when run in changed combinations, so contiguity of functioning does not cause the waste¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 1917 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Groups given single trials in various combinations of the units, including the fully reversed order IV, III, II, I, never averaged higher than 2/5ths errors per day, showing absolute control over units kept as units. → Pechstein 1917

Evidence¶

Pechstein 1917¶

Pechstein, L. A. (1917). Alleged Elements of Waste in Learning a Motor Problem by the "Part" Method. The Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0071944

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Groups taught the four units were given a single trial in various unit combinations, such as the reversed order IV, III, II, I, made possible by the common-center entrances and exits. "In no case did the groups average higher than 2/5ths errors per day."

"In no case did the groups average higher than 2/5ths errors per day. The subjects showed almost constant ability to adjust to changing requirements day after day"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The motor habit for a maze section shows practically no disintegration over the intervals between part-learning trials — related
• Retro-active inhibition does not explain part learners' failure, since unit I retained almost perfect control — related
• For rats, whole and part maze learning show no difference in trials, but the whole method saves time and errors — related
• Short maze units learned under massed conditions connect into a serial whole with great economy, whereas units learned under distributed conditions connect only with extreme difficulty — related