Learning And Memory 1st Edition Darrell S

Rudmann download

https://ebookbell.com/product/learning-and-memory-1st-edition-
darrell-s-rudmann-52032074

Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.

Learning And Memory From Brain To Behavior Mark Gluck Eduardo Mercado

https://ebookbell.com/product/learning-and-memory-from-brain-to-
behavior-mark-gluck-eduardo-mercado-46719160

Learning And Memory Basic Principles Processes And Procedures 6th

Edition Terry

https://ebookbell.com/product/learning-and-memory-basic-principles-
processes-and-procedures-6th-edition-terry-55362168

Learning And Memory A Comprehensive Reference 1st Ed John Byrne

https://ebookbell.com/product/learning-and-memory-a-comprehensive-
reference-1st-ed-john-byrne-2320814

Learning And Memory From Brain To Behavior 1st Mark A Gluck

https://ebookbell.com/product/learning-and-memory-from-brain-to-
behavior-1st-mark-a-gluck-2355770
Learning And Memory 1 Learning Theory And Behaviour 1 Ed Randolf
Menzel

https://ebookbell.com/product/learning-and-memory-1-learning-theory-
and-behaviour-1-ed-randolf-menzel-4119312

Learning And Memory From Brain To Behavior 2nd Ed Gluck Mark A Myers

https://ebookbell.com/product/learning-and-memory-from-brain-to-
behavior-2nd-ed-gluck-mark-a-myers-5273368

Learning And Memory 4 Molecular Mechanisms Of Memory 1 Ed Sweatt

https://ebookbell.com/product/learning-and-memory-4-molecular-
mechanisms-of-memory-1-ed-sweatt-5392502

Learning And Memory From Brain To Behavior 3rd Mark A Gluck

https://ebookbell.com/product/learning-and-memory-from-brain-to-
behavior-3rd-mark-a-gluck-5559882

Learning And Memory A Comprehensive Reference 2nd Edition John H Byrne

https://ebookbell.com/product/learning-and-memory-a-comprehensive-
reference-2nd-edition-john-h-byrne-6998860
Learning and Memory
For my wife, Debbie, and my sons, Oliver and Linus,
and my parents, Jerry and Bari

Sara Miller McCune founded SAGE Publishing in 1965 to support

the dissemination of usable knowledge and educate a global
community. SAGE publishes more than 1000 journals and over
800 new books each year, spanning a wide range of subject areas.
Our growing selection of library products includes archives, data,
case studies and video. SAGE remains majority owned by our
founder and after her lifetime will become owned by a charitable
trust that secures the company’s continued independence.

Los Angeles | London | New Delhi | Singapore | Washington DC | Melbourne

Learning and Memory

Darrell Rudmann
Shawnee State University
FOR INFORMATION: Copyright © 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized

SAGE Publications, Inc.
in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including
2455 Teller Road photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval
Thousand Oaks, California 91320 system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
E-mail: [email protected]
All trademarks depicted within this book, including trademarks appearing
as part of a screenshot, figure, or other image, are included solely for the
SAGE Publications Ltd. purpose of illustration and are the property of their respective holders.
1 Oliver’s Yard The use of the trademarks in no way indicates any relationship with, or
55 City Road endorsement by, the holders of said trademarks.
London EC1Y 1SP
Printed in the United States of America
United Kingdom
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
SAGE Publications India Pvt. Ltd.
B 1/I 1 Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area Names: Rudmann, Darrell S., author.
Mathura Road, New Delhi 110 044 Title: Learning and memory / Darrell Rudmann, Shawnee State University.
India Description: First Edition. | Thousand Oaks : SAGE Publications, [2017] |
Includes bibliographical references and index.
SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Pte. Ltd.
Identifiers: LCCN 2017026480 | ISBN 9781483374833 (pbk. : alk. paper)
3 Church Street
Subjects: LCSH: Learning, Psychology of. | Memory. | Neuropsychology.
#10–04 Samsung Hub
Singapore 049483 Classification: LCC BF318 .R73 2017 | DDC 153.1/5—dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017026480

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Acquisitions Editor: Abbie Rickard
Editorial Assistant: Jennifer Cline
Marketing Manager: Katherine Hepburn
Production Editor: Veronica Stapleton Hooper
Copy Editor: Ellen Howard
Typesetter: C&M Digitals (P) Ltd.
Proofreader: Dennis W. Webb
Indexer: Karen Wiley
Cover Designer: Anupama Krishnan 17 18 19 20 21 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Contents

Preface xi

About the Author xiii

1 History of Learning and Memory 1

Learning Objectives 2 Social Learning 12

Overview 2 Cognitive Psychology 12
Information Processing Theories 13
“Buddy O’Dell” 2 Metamemory Awareness and Strategies 14
Early Philosophical Approaches 4 Cognitive Neuroscience 15
Socrates’s Early Functionalism 4 Integrating the Approaches 15
Aristotle’s Associationism 4 Themes in the Book 17
Descartes’s Dualism 6
Chapter Summary 18
Locke’s Tabula Rasa 7
Kant’s Interactionism 8 Review Questions 18
William James’s Functionalism 9 Key Terms 19
A Twentieth-Century Approach: Behaviorism 11 Further Resources 19
Contemporary Approaches 11 References 19

2 Common Research Methods in Learning and Memory 21

Learning Objectives 22 Surveys and Interviews 29

Overview 22 Memory Diaries 31
Experiments 32
Common Features 23
Performance Tasks 23 Issues of Quality 34
Selective Interference Tasks 25 Chapter Summary 35
Performance Measurement 25
Review Questions 36
Accuracy 26
Efficiency 26 Key Terms 36
Metamemory Judgments 27 Further Resources 37
Brain Functioning 28
References 37

3 Neurological Basis of Learning 39

Learning Objectives 40 The Case of H.M. 40

Overview 40 How Neurons Communicate: Neurotransmission 41
How Neurons Adapt to Support Learning 42 Implicit Learning 61
Chemical Changes Across Existing Synapses 43 What Is Learned in Implicit Learning 65
Changes to the Dendrites 46 Chapter Summary 66
Additional Neurons 47
Review Questions 66
Classical Conditioning 48
Key Terms 67
Further Applications 55
Further Resources 67
Skill Learning 57
Role of Practice 58 References 68
Role of Feedback 60

PART I: LEARNING 73

4 Behavioral Learning 75

Learning Objectives 76 Biological Constraints 92

Overview 76 Summary 93

Operant Conditioning Theory 76 Avoidance Conditioning 93

Basic Components 81 Learned Helplessness 94

Strengthening Behavior 82 Weakening Behavior 95

Kinds of Reinforcers 83 Effective Punishment 96
Brain Basis for Reinforcement 84 Indirect Issues With Punishment 98
Factors That Impact Reinforcement 85 Decelerators 99

Schedules of Reinforcement 86 Overview of Operant Conditioning Theory 101

Ratio Schedules 87 Chapter Summary 102
Interval Schedules 89 Review Questions 103
Other Schedules 89
Key Terms 103
Shaping 90
Further Resources 104
Response Chains 90
References 105
Stimulus Control 91

5 Social Learning 107

Learning Objectives 108 Primary Assumptions 118

Overview 108 Piaget’s Stages of Cognitive Development 119
Sensorimotor Stage (birth until
Learning by Watching Others 108 eighteen–twenty-four months) 119
Observational Learning 110 Preoperational Stage (eighteen–
Imitation 110 twenty-four months to seven years) 120
Modeling 111 Concrete Operations Stage (ages
Attribution Theory 114 six–seven until eleven–twelve) 121
Self-Efficacy Theory 115 Formal Operations Stage (ages eleven
Self-Regulation Theory 116 or twelve through adulthood) 122
Educational Implications 122
Development of Learning 117
Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development 117 Social Context of Cognitive Development 124
Chapter Summary 126 Further Resources 127
Review Questions 126 References 127
Key Terms 127

6 Affect and Motivation in Learning 131

Learning Objectives 132 Expectancy-Value Theory 144

Expectancy 145
Overview 132
Instrumentality 145
Emotions During Learning 134 Valences 147
Motivation 137 Work Design Theory 148
Intrinsic/Extrinsic Kinds 138 Motivation in Education 150
Classic Motivational Theories 139 Chapter Summary 151
Modern Motivational Theories 140 Review Questions 151
Control Theories 141
Key Terms 151
Perceived Task Value 141
Interests 141 Further Resources 152
Goal-Setting Theory 142 References 152

7 Cognitive Learning 157

Learning Objectives 158 Conscious Learning 172

Overview 158 Rehearsal Time 172
Repetition of Rehearsal 173
Short-Term Memory Store 159
Strategies During Rehearsal 175
Processing Information in the
Short-Term Memory Store 161 Forming Memories 178
Features of the Short-Term Memory Store 162 Consolidation 179
Causes of Information Loss in Neurological Research 179
Short-Term Memory 163 Chapter Summary 180
Baddeley’s “Working Memory” Model 165 Review Questions 181
Verbal Information 166
Key Terms 181
Spatial Memory 168
Episodic Buffer 171 Further Resources 182
Central Executive 171 References 182

PART II: MEMORY 187

8 Retrieval 189

Learning Objectives 190 Retrieving Memories 191

Overview 190 The Experience of Retrieval 191
Feeling of Knowing 192 State-Dependent Cues 204
Theories of Feeling of Knowing 193 Mood-Dependent Cues 205
Transfer-Appropriate Processing 205
Retrieval Cues 194
Retrieval in Groups 206
Prospective Memory 195 Collaborative Memory 206
Models of Prospective Memory 195 Explanations for Collaborative Inhibition 207
The Biological Basis of Retrieving Memories 197 Reducing Collaborative Inhibition 208
Disrupting Long-Term Traces 197 Chapter Summary 209
Retrieval to Improve Learning 198 Retrieval Strategies 210
Repeated Retrieval 199 Review Questions 210
Theoretical Explanations for Retrieval Benefits 201
Key Terms 211
Situational Effects on Retrieval 202
Further Resources 211
Encoding Specificity Principle 202
Place-Dependent Cues 203 References 211

9 Episodic and Autobiographical Memories 217

Learning Objectives 218 Organization by Time or Theme 228

Overview 218 Emotions and Their Role 229

Episodic Memories 219 Conway’s Self-Memory System 230

Reexperiencing Past Events 219 Developmental Changes in Autobiographical
Involuntary Episodic Memories 220 Memories 230
Visual Perspectives in Episodic Memories 220 Developing a Narrative 232
Characteristics of Episodic Memories 220 Autobiographical Memory and Older Adults 235
Episodic Memory in Contrast With Other Brain Processing Underlying Autobiographical
Kinds of Memories 221 Memories 235
Brain Processing of Episodic Memories 222 The Autobiographical Memory Retrieval Network 236
Flashbulb Memories 222
Accuracy of Flashbulb Memories 223 Chapter Summary 238

Autobiographical Memory System 224 Review Questions 239

Dimensions and Functions of Key Terms 239
Autobiographical Memories 225 Further Resources 239
Contextual Complexities 228
References 240
The Structure of Autobiographical Memories 228

10 Semantic Memory 245

Learning Objectives 246 Meaning and Context 248

Overview 246 Recall in Semantic Memory 249
Recognition in Semantic Memory 250
Tulving’s Episodic/Semantic
Memory Distinction 247 Knowledge Representation 250
Remember/Know Judgments 247 Associationistic Models of Knowledge
Neuroscience Evidence for a Distinction 248 Representation 251
Declarative Versus Nondeclarative Distinction 248 Semantic Networks of Associations 252
 Connectivity in Semantic Networks 253 Constructivism 263
Connectionist Models 254 Modern Constructivism 264
Holistic Approaches of Knowledge Representation 254 Chapter Summary 265
Concepts 255 Review Questions 266
Mental Models 255
Key Terms 266
Schemas 257
Structure of Schemas 259 Further Resources 267
Functions of Schemas 260 References 267
Scripts 261

11 Forgetting 271

Learning Objectives 272 Cue Availability 287

Overview 272 Retrieval-Induced Inhibition 287
Whether Memories Can Be Inhibited
Forgetting Is Normal 272
Unconsciously 288
Normal Rate of Forgetting 273
Other Retrieval Errors 289
Forgetting Motor Skills 275
Output Monitoring Failures 289
Forgetting Events Over Time 275
Source Monitoring Failures 290
Forgetting Over the Lifespan 276 Forms of Source Monitoring Failures 292
Childhood Amnesia 276 Suggestibility and Bias 294
Possible Causes of Childhood Amnesia 279
False Memories 295
Reminiscence Bump 280
Chapter Summary 296
Causes of Forgetting 282
Review Questions 296
Decay 282
Interference 283 Key Terms 297
Trace Degradation 285 Further Resources 297
Cue Impairment 286
References 297

PART III: ADVANCED TOPICS 303

12 Learning and Memory in the Real World 305

Learning Objectives 306 Learning and Education:

Overview 306 Classroom Management 315

Learning and Advertising: Consumer Research 306 Learning and the Workplace:
Advertising 307
Employee Training 318
Evoking Emotions Using Advertising 307 Learning and Aggression: Violence and Media 321
Theoretical Basis for Emotional Experiments on Aggressive Imitation 322
Conditioning Through Advertisements 307 Numbing Effect 323
Background Music in Advertising 309 Some Perspective 323
Musical Congruence With Brand 310 Memory and the Law: Eyewitness Memory 323
Celebrities in Advertising 311 Chapter Summary 327
Text Versus Visual Components in an
Review Questions 327
Advertisement 313
Ad Placement 313 Key Terms 327
Product Perception 313 Further Resources 328
Store Atmospherics 314 References 328

Index 333
 xi

Preface

T he study of human learning and memory is a remarkably complex area of study. It

lies at the intersection of nearly all human activity, both those actions we are con-
sciously aware of as well as those we are not. Experimental psychologists have investi-
gated human learning for the past one hundred years and, over time, have developed a
number of theoretical approaches to try to capture the complexities of human learning.
Some of the theoretical approaches resulted in radical changes within the field itself,
altering how psychologists explain milestones in child development, what managerial
techniques work best, whether we should trust our confidence in our own memories, and
how to train your dog. Now, modern brain imaging brings another perspective to both
back up and refute those theories that had been based primarily on behavioral research.
My purpose in writing this textbook is to provide the reader with an understanding of the
core concepts that are foundational to the study of human learning and memory.
This textbook is for students who are relatively new to psychological science, and it pro-
vides a broad survey of the major theoretical perspectives of learning and memory. Instead
of focusing solely on older learning theory or only on contemporary memory research, this
text includes classic behaviorist theories of learning, social learning theories, theories of
emotion and motivation in learning, modern cognitive theories of learning and memory,
and the neurological underpinnings of these perspectives. I have developed an approach
that I believe clearly juxtaposes the different theoretical approaches in a modern way.
This textbook is most appropriate for courses that bridge learning and memory, such
as “Psychology of Learning and Memory,” and is the textbook I have been trying to find
for my own learning and memory course. It is written primarily for students who have had
perhaps one introductory course in psychology. The text could be used as a core or supple-
mentary text for graduate courses in education (educational leadership, school psychol-
ogy, curriculum and instruction programs), or for graduate health sciences courses with
a need for a resource on psychological theories on learning and memory in development.
To help the student and the instructor with the myriad of important concepts and
theories to cover, each chapter includes an outline, a short set of learning objectives,
overview and summary sections, review questions, related resources, and references.
Whenever possible, I provide descriptions of classic and modern research mixed with
real-life stories that illustrate applications of the concepts and theories. For instructors,
I have prepared a set of slides with artwork from the book, a test bank of multiple-choice
questions to pull from, and suggested activities and lecture extenders for each chapter.

“Memory is not what is recorded but what we remember.”

—Octavio Paz

Acknowledgments
I must acknowledge the help and encouragement I have received from editors Reid
Hester, Abbie Rickard, and Veronica Stapleton Hooper of SAGE Publications and copy
editor Ellen Howard. Several years of work resulted from a fairly innocent question
xii Learning and Memory

I had asked Reid about an out-of-print text, and not once have I felt their support for this
project waiver. I would also like to thank the following undergraduates for helping me
develop supplemental material and activities:

Lauren Beam
Jessica Hilterbrand
Trever Jacks
Jade Lightle
Victoria McDowell
L. Catherine Smith
Jordan Zweigart

I am thankful for Tess Collier, a Shawnee State University librarian and my article
wrassler. I’m also thankful for the anonymous reviewers who provided feedback on what
were some pretty awful drafts. I attempted to incorporate every comment that I could,
and the improvement overall was substantial.
I would also like to thank the following reviewers for their feedback and contribu-
tions to the manuscript:

Vivian C. Hsu, PhD, Penn State University Abington

Jennifer A. Joy-Gaba, Virginia Commonwealth University

Any errors remaining in the text are mine alone. You’re more than welcome to let
me know what improvements you would like to see in future editions at drudmann@
shawnee.edu.
 xiii

About the Author

Darrell Rudmann earned his PhD in 2005 from the University of Illinois in Educational
Psychology with a concentration in Learning and Instruction. Since 1996, he has
taught undergraduate psychology courses at several open-access institutions (Parkland
Community College, Champaign, Illinois; Indiana University East in Richmond, Indiana;
Shawnee State University, Portsmouth, Ohio). He is currently an Associate Professor at
Shawnee State University and Chair of the Social Sciences Department.
 CHAPTER

© iStock.com/mahroch

History of Learning and Memory

Chapter Outline
•• Learning Objectives {{ Social Learning
•• Overview {{ Cognitive Psychology
•• “Buddy O’Dell” ¡¡Information Processing Theories
•• Early Philosophical Approaches ¡¡Metamemory Awareness and Strategies
{{ Socrates’s Early Functionalism {{ Cognitive Neuroscience
{{ Aristotle’s Associationism {{ Integrating the Approaches
{{ Descartes’s Dualism
•• Themes in the Book
{{ Locke’s Tabula Rasa
•• Chapter Summary
{{ Kant’s Interactionism
•• Review Questions
{{ William James’s Functionalism
•• Key Terms
•• A Twentieth-Century Approach: Behaviorism •• Further Resources
•• Contemporary Approaches •• References
 2 Learning and Memory

Learning Objectives
1. Identify the contributions of philosophers to the early study of learning and memory.
2. Understand the basic assumptions of behaviorism.
3. Summarize the major contemporary approaches to the study of learning and memory.
4. Describe the six themes of the textbook.

Overview
Our ability to learn and store what we have learned is a remarkably important capability,
pervasive to nearly every aspect of our lives. Consider the following “thought experiment”:
imagine you had the opportunity to have the vacation of your dreams but would never
remember it, or you could have the memory of the vacation but would not have taken the
trip at all. Which would you select? Most of us are initially pulled in the direction of want-
ing the trip but having no memory of it—but, of course, you can see the problem. Having
no memory of the trip means the trip will have no influence on us afterwards. No happy
memories, no feeling of satisfaction, no photos or videos to share. In fact, we’d probably
still be pining to take that trip—the very one we had already had—because we would’ve
forgotten we’d already taken it! It may be counter-intuitive now, but having a memory of
the trip, even if a false one, could likely have a larger impact on us than a forgotten journey.

“Buddy O’Dell”
As a young man, my grandfather Delor “Bud” Benoit was a professional boxer who went
by the show name “Buddy O’Dell,” although he was not Irish (see Fig. 1.1). He credited
the violin lessons he was made to take as a child for his early boxing experience—he had
to fight off bullies as he was walking to and from lessons while protecting his violin. He
fought Jake La Motta in 1942 and lost in a close decision. His boxing experience left him
with occasional vision problems, but he was otherwise in very good health. While serving as
Seaman Specialist in the US Navy in World War II, his ship, the USS Princeton, was hit by a
500-pound bomb from a Japanese dive bomber. Despite his dislocated shoulder from the blast,
he was able to tie a lifeline around a wounded crewmate and lower his body
FIGURE 1.1   Bud’s boxing days down a stairwell before a lieutenant encouraged Bud to jump off the deck
into the ocean. The Princeton continued to burn and secondary explosions
began, taking more lives, until rescuing destroyers had to sink it.
Bud was a serious poker player, and (as the family legend goes) he
would sometimes travel to Las Vegas and gamble until he had enough
money to pay the rent. He was always a smooth, easygoing talker who
seemed to be able to hold a conversation with anyone; maybe it was
the result of his blue-collar upbringing plus his university experience
at Michigan State University on a boxing scholarship. He eventually
earned a JD, and spent his career doing administrative work for State
Farm Insurance.
Today he is 91 years old and living in a monitored group home for
seniors. His health has always been exceptionally good, but gradual
 CHAPTER 1 History of Learning and Memory 3

changes to his memory had started to occur. The loss of his memory meant not keeping
up with basic home cleanliness. He kept firing the cleaning service his adult daughter
(my mother) would hire for him, telling them he could take care of it himself. His dogs
would eliminate about anywhere, and he would not remember to clean up after them. His
stove had to be replaced after the family found a nest of rats living in the back of it. He
came to believe he didn’t have enough money to get by, even though he was fairly well off.
But he didn’t remember. Eventually, scam artists and occasionally his bank would take
advantage of his inability to remember his money situation. At one point, family mem-
bers had to camp outside his house to scare off a woman coming to collect a large sum of
money he had promised her as down payment for some future return investment (similar
to that Nigerian prince email scam, except that criminals were physically at your home!).
The decision to move Bud from his long-term home was not an easy one for my
mother. Even though he adapted to his new surroundings fairly well, he repeatedly asked
to return to his old home, since that’s what he remembered as his. He once talked a hos-
pital shuttle driver into taking him there instead of his group home. It had been emptied
months earlier, and he had no key to get in. By now, despite his acumen for talking people
into doing what he wanted, he no longer remembered or recognized family members,
including my mother. It’s been this way for some time. The loss of memory begins to take
away who one was, after a while, and adjusting to new circumstances is difficult.
Recently, my mother arrived at the group home, and Bud met her at the door. He
knew her name, and asked her to come in and sit. Once seated, he turned to her and said,
“All right. What am I doing here?” In the conversation that followed, my mother and her
father had a very lucid conversation about what had been happening to him over the past
few years and the decisions that had been made to that point. She explained. He apolo-
gized for the trouble he had caused.
It was not to last. By the next visit, he was back to not remembering. He has adjusted
to his new home and seems happy, but he remembers little. It is as if, somewhere under
the memory loss and likely brain decay, the person I know as my grandfather is still
there, unable to get out (see Fig. 1.2).

FIGURE 1.2   A recent photo of Bud

4 Learning and Memory

This has become a common story. Many families, particularly those with long-living
parents, are running into events like these. While the physical form of the person is still
present, and often their habits and even personality remain intact, the loss of memory
is catastrophic for individual functioning. The “remembering power” of the brain is so
beneficial that its loss is extremely noticeable.
In this book, we will explore what it means to learn and to know. We will explore the
vast amount of research on learning and the kinds of memory, the amazing diversity of
activities that memory supports, and what happens when memory fails us. My goal is to
convince you that, ultimately, we are what we learn and remember. Much of who we are
and who we believe ourselves to be is determined not by what precisely has happened to
us, but by what we remember of what has happened to us and the stories we believe those
remembrances tell. To start our in-depth study of memory, let’s examine where the field
of study on learning and memory has been and where it is today. We’ll start with classic
philosophical approaches and then move to more recent, contemporary approaches.

Early Philosophical Approaches

It’s understandable to question whether it is worth looking back to earlier centuries to
understand what we do today. It doesn’t always feel relevant, and instead is like rehash-
ing the past. In this situation though, questions about learning, memory, and the nature
of knowledge reach back a long ways. Prior to psychological science, the nature of mind
and memory were exclusively in the domain of philosophy and theology. In many cases,
the general ideas that philosophers had about learning and memory are still represented
in modern theories. So, while delving so far into the past can seem like a detour, what you
will find in this section are ideas and relationships that are prescientific, but are around
to this day. Having a basic understanding of these ideas will prepare you for the modern
research and theory we’ll encounter in the next chapters.

Socrates’s Early Functionalism

The Greek philosopher Socrates (469–388 BCE) noted that many objects could be
grouped together as “instances” of the same idea even if they do not look alike, such as
different chairs. The physical, surface features were not always what mattered. He sug-
gested that objects in our memory are based on their functions. That is, objects in mem-
ory are stored by the potential function that they may serve. For example, the diversity
in what people consider to be “cars” is rather large, but it doesn’t seem to take us long
to add new models we encounter into a “car” category. Socrates’s idea about this concep-
tualization of how memory for objects works allows that what we remember and know
about the world isn’t constrained by the physical or material aspects of the real-world
objects. Thus, whether a coffee mug is made of ceramic or plastic or steel is irrelevant to
our being able to remember what a coffee mug is and to recognize one. Using Socrates’s
conceptualization of knowledge, one can also recognize a coffee mug as a mug even if it is
cracked or chipped. This “functional” approach to explaining how we know what objects
are is an approach that is still around today.

Aristotle’s Associationism
The Greek philosopher Aristotle (364–323 BCE; see Fig. 1.3) intuited a number of the
issues and approaches that were later developed by other philosophers and psychologists.
 CHAPTER 1 History of Learning and Memory 5

FIGURE 1.3   Aristotle

© Marie-Lan Nguyen/Wikimedia Commons

He based at least some of his intuitions on the theories of his teacher, Plato (427–347
BCE), who had used various metaphors to try to capture the nature of human memory.
Plato had described memory as being like wax, on which impressions could be made. He
noted that some people were better at recording memories than others. For some people,
it was as if their wax was less pliable. This is an observation that psychologists now often
call a matter of “individual differences.”
Likewise, Aristotle noted that memory is not particularly static or frozen, but could
move; it has a relatively fluid nature. Thinking of one thing can cause one to think of
or remember something else. Aristotle proposed that this fluid process of thinking and
remembering obeyed a set of rules such as similarity, contiguity, and causal properties.
For instance, remembering one event can remind us of another similar event, hence the term
“similarity.” We encounter this often in daily life. Thinking of one embarrassing moment
makes other related moments seem to come to mind quite readily. Our memories appear to
be highly interconnected based on similarity.
Aristotle noted that we tend to associate those events or objects that occur together
frequently, which he called his rule of contiguity. Experiencing two events together
enough, and we form a connection between them in memory. We associate applause with
acknowledgement of a stellar performance. All of marketing is based on this rule: I might
like eating cheeseburgers, but with lots of exposure to marketing through billboards and
commercials, I have come to associate a large yellow “M” with cheeseburgers.
When we experience an event that reliably produces a certain outcome, we will recall
that outcome. This is Aristotle’s rule of causal properties. Instead of learning a simple
6 Learning and Memory

association between two events, we can decide that one event is causing the other. An
infant in a high chair playing with toy keys might be delighted by the sound of dropping
the toy keys on the floor (and watching family scurry to pick the toy up). After a while,
the infant will become less interested. At that point, the infant presumably can recall the
outcome and is less surprised or interested in it.
Aristotle also intuited that memory is similar to searching for information—much
like clicking around on web pages from the Internet, following from one site to another,
following a path between memories. He also believed that concepts were arranged men-
tally in a hierarchy. That is, there are classes of concepts arranged in levels: some con-
cepts embody a great many other objects, like “furniture,” whereas others are of a lower
level and are more specific, like “side-table drawer.”
In summary, Socrates and Aristotle posited ideas that are foundational to the field
today. These include Socrates’s idea that the function of what objects do might be what
constitutes our knowledge of them, and Aristotle’s claim that there are different mecha-
nisms for learning.

Descartes’s Dualism
The French philosopher Rene Descartes (1596–1650; see Fig. 1.4) believed that at least
some knowledge was innate, that is, with us from birth. In particular, he believed certain
abstract concepts could not be sensed directly. For instance, he believed that there is an
innate idea of “perfection,” and that a supernatural being, “God,” embodies all aspects of
perfection. He also believed that other abstract concepts we possess—such as time, hope,
and infinity—could not be experienced through the senses and, as a result, were most
likely innate. Some of these ideas may have been simply capitulations to the powerful
Catholic Church system that was present at the time; but other concepts that Descartes
believed could not be experienced through the senses, so they had to be internally based.

FIGURE 1.4   Rene Descartes

©iStockphoto.com/GeorgiosArt
 CHAPTER 1 History of Learning and Memory 7

Hence, he believed that what we sense of the world around us is largely accurate, since
our minds have a sense of what perfection is, as well as an understanding of the perfec-
tion of the God who created the world.
Descartes famously posited that one could make a distinction between the “mind”
and the “body,” the physical support for mental activity. He concluded that the human
body interacted with an immaterial soul somewhere in the brain. Neuropsychology, the
study of the workings of the brain and nervous system, is commonly based on prior dam-
age from disease or injury and has a long history that began during this time.
Descartes was a pioneer in his understanding of the mechanical nature of physiology
that human and animal bodies function like a kind of machine. During Descartes’s time,
theory and research into the anatomy began in earnest, mostly through the dissection of
animals. The belief that some element of God was embodied in humans did not extend to
animals, who were thought not to possess a soul or a consciousness. As a result, animals
were primarily thought of as “automata,” or machines. This belief was not uncommon in
that time. This led to a rise in animal research, primarily to understand the mechanics
of physiology and anatomy. Unfortunately, this does mean that little thought or concern
was given to the animals that were dissected and cut open, often while awake, during a
time when there were no anesthetics.

Locke’s Tabula Rasa

John Locke, a British philosopher, disagreed with multiple aspects of Descartes’s stance
on the innateness of ideas (see Fig. 1.5). In contrast to Descartes, Locke (1632–1704)
believed all human knowledge comes from experience with the world around us. At birth,
we are devoid of ideas—a tabula rasa, or blank slate. The mind has two kinds of experi-
ences of the world: sensations of objects and those reflections we have upon our own
ideas. We have these impressions immediately in the conscious mind and can recall them
later as memories. Locke believed that the same mechanistic approach used to explain

FIGURE 1.5   John Locke

©iStockphoto.com/denisk0
8 Learning and Memory

how the human body functions could also be used to explain human thought. In other
words, basic or simple ideas could be had by experiencing the world around us—how the
sun feels on our skin, or how peanut butter tastes. These simple ideas are like images, are
highly sensory in nature, and could not be reduced to any smaller unit of thought since
they were just sensory impressions.
If we combine many of these simple ideas or images, they can give rise to more com-
plex ideas, Locke suggested. Experiencing a “book” is the result of a combination of sim-
pler sensory experiences that might involve shape, texture, weight, and temperature. All
mental content he believed to be the result of adding different sensory units. The basic
view Locke advocated is not terribly different from how a child might build a fairly com-
plex house or space ship from toy building blocks. The simple ideas combined together
form more advanced, complex ones. In every instance, however, the idea is made up
of sensory elements and is not an abstraction. Locke was not specific about how these
ideas were combined or associated, although he clearly believed contiguity and similarity
played large roles, as Aristotle had proposed.
So, from Locke’s perspective, memories are a copy of earlier sensations. Normal
memories, therefore, are fairly accurate since they are a replication of what was expe-
rienced. There is an interesting theoretical consequence to this view: If memories are
exact copies of direct sensations, then no change or distortion can occur. There can be
no misconceptions if memory is simply a copy of a sensory event, like a photocopy made
from a copier machine. It is also unclear if memories can have gaps—missing pieces of
information—under Locke’s approach.
Locke’s ideas were extremely influential inside of philosophy. Locke was considered
to be an empiricist, meaning one who relies on observation and experimentation to sup-
port his or her ideas. His beliefs on empiricism drove much of the developing science of
the day. Locke’s ideas and approach had an impact on psychology as well. His brand of
philosophy, associationism, that learned connections between different ideas and events
are the basis for all thought and meaning, was the foundation for a movement in psychol-
ogy known as “behaviorism” in early 20th century America. We’ll discuss behaviorism as
a movement in the next major section (p. 11), and Chapter 4 is devoted to a major theory
of the movement.
In summary, Descartes and Locke exist in a kind of philosophical chokehold.
Descartes proposed the existence of innate knowledge for understanding the world and
distinguished between the functions of mental activity and the structure of the physical
body. Locke, however, took a hard-line, sensory-only approach to learning and memory.

Kant’s Interactionism
German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724–1804; see Fig. 1.6) provided a compromise
between Descartes’s and Locke’s views, seeing both approaches as partially right and par-
tially wrong. A child doesn’t have innate, genetic concepts like “car,” or “bottle,” or “ball” at
birth, Kant reasoned; but the child certainly has the biological underpinnings to form those
concepts at the right time. The biological structure may include unconscious reasoning
skills (like understanding time and space) that allow the child to form these concepts when
he or she is ready to understand and learn them. In what is known as Kant’s interaction-
ism, mind and body interact and influence each other. In modern terms, this is like having
the computer hardware and an operating system to allow software and apps to run on it.
From Kant’s perspective, we have the biological capacity to interpret the world around
us (e.g., eyes, ears, touch, the nervous system). This means the biological system that
 CHAPTER 1 History of Learning and Memory 9

FIGURE 1.6   Immanuel Kant

©iStockphoto.com/ZU_09
makes up the human body grants the ability to form abstract ideas like “ball” when the
human is ready. Of course, if people can interpret stimuli in the environment, then that
also means people can misinterpret what goes on around them. I’m reminded of my oldest
son, who, as a toddler, refused to eat vegetables. I tried to introduce him to vegetable juice
through a colored sippy cup. When I handed the cup to him, he saw the dark-colored liq-
uid in the transparent cup. He announced “Chocolate milk!” and—before I could correct
him—proceeded to drink. He was immediately disgusted, and I could never get him to try
vegetable juice again. Our interpretations of the external world are, on the whole, quite
accurate, but not always perfect. This is a distinct advantage to Kant’s ideas over Locke’s,
which didn’t permit distortions based on expectations or misunderstandings.
What one knows of the world, according to Kant, is what one can perceive of it. Our
knowledge of the world is constructed in a generally accurate way, but it is not a perfect
copy. Kant’s view also tolerates those gaps in knowledge that develop from time to time,
perhaps when someone is distracted or too fatigued. Additionally, Kant expected that
when there are gaps in what is learned and remembered, people could make inferences
about what should be there. These ideas are still popular within the field today. Kant
used the term schema for the abstract knowledge that we mentally form of the external
world, and a considerable number of theories have been developed to try to explain the
mental structure of the abstract knowledge of the world.

William James’s Functionalism

Our last philosopher is, in many ways, at the transition point between philosophy and
psychology. Considered to be the founder of American psychology, William James
(1842–1910; see Fig. 1.7) wrote one of the most popular textbooks on psychology in his
day, although he himself did not like to think of himself as a psychologist. Many of his
10 Learning and Memory

FIGURE 1.7   William James

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wm_james.jpg, {{PD-US}}

topic choices for chapters were prescient of modern topics in psychology despite the
coming wave of behaviorism in America. He had a particular view of how people learn
that incorporated biological change with development, much like psychologists attempt
to do today.
James believed that the nervous system is adaptable and can be modified by experi-
ence. Particular motor skills become associated within the nervous system over time as a
sequence is learned, so practice is important for learning a particular skill or habit. While
he believed the nervous system was flexible, it was so only until age 30. After that, habits
become rigid (he was not correct in this regard). Therefore, he believed it was necessary
to teach all young people good habits at an early age. He believed that learning the right
set of habits could eliminate many social ills, including war, famine, and ugliness. He
encouraged all youth to be drafted into the military to develop the necessary habits for
later. The idea that learning a particular set of habits will instill a better life is a value
many parents encourage in their children, and it is the basis of many self-help books and
websites on productivity and happiness.
James was able to clearly define what he meant by a “memory”: “knowledge of an
event, or a fact which is out of conscious awareness currently,” and the awareness “that
we have thought or experienced it before” (James, 1890, p. 648). We use memory, accord-
ing to James, to reproduce those earlier events and facts. These events and facts leave
paths or traces between nerve centers in the brain. Experience adds to the traces of a
memory and strengthens it.
In summary, Kant and James began the process of modernizing conceptualizations of
the act of learning and language around the phenomenon of memory. Kant proposed that
the biological structure of the human body gives rise to our mental activities, and that
we perceive our world around us and build what we know. James successfully promoted
the field through a popular textbook on psychology, which included and defined modern
topics such as learning through experience and memory.
 CHAPTER 1 History of Learning and Memory 11

For the remainder of this chapter, we’ll examine the major movements that have
contributed to our understanding of how learning and memory work, beginning with the
movement that was inspired by Locke’s theories, behaviorism.

A Twentieth-Century Approach: Behaviorism

Locke’s ideas had an impact on psychology some time later. The behaviorist movement
in psychology began in the early part of the 20th century, lasted well into the 1960s,
and primarily occurred in the United States. The name behaviorism was applied to the
movement precisely for how it sounds: the study of how people and animals changed
their behaviors due to interactions with their environment. It was strictly focused on
observable behaviors as part of a desire to make psychology as a field more of a true
science. If a behavior was unobservable, it was unmeasurable, and therefore not worth
pursuing. This meant that highly popular topics today, such as consciousness, motivation,
dreams, personality, thought, and memory, were not considered to be topics that could be
successfully researched.
The behaviorists used Locke’s ideas of a blank slate and of associations as the bases
of thought and reframed them as stimulus-response associations. People form a con-
nection between an event in the environment, like seeing a plate of cooked food, and a
response such as hunger. Often the responses of interest were negative emotions: fear,
disgust, or anxiety. Behaviorists would not have studied emotions directly, however.
Rather, they would have considered them to be merely the words we use to anthropo-
morphize those situations, at worst, or phenomena that couldn’t be studied, at best.
For a major part of the 20th century, research into the mental aspects of the human
experience were set aside as American psychologists focused primarily on systems of
stimulus-response associations through reinforcements and punishments, with a heavy
focus on refining research methodology (primarily through experimentation). While
many of the findings that came out of this period have been abandoned as psychol-
ogy moved on, the techniques for rigorous research design have not been left behind.
Behaviorist theories are still applied in a variety of situations, including advertising and
marketing, animal training, classroom management, and in therapeutic settings. We’ll
take a closer look at behaviorists and their approach to learning in Chapter 4.

Contemporary Approaches
Besides the behaviorist tradition, there are three main approaches to the study of learn-
ing and memory today. By the 1970s, a renewed interest within American psychology on
mental activities meant a shift in focus away from strict behaviorism. First, psychologists
took a greater concern for how the social situation affects how we learn. Social learning
theory (sometimes referred to as social cognitive theory) was developed to describe
how people learn by watching what happens to others and by imitating the successes
others have. The expectations people form for themselves became of interest, since they
affect how much effort people will put into an activity.
Second, psychologists began to reconsider whether abstract, unobservable human
activities like thought, memory, and attention could be systematically studied after all.
Cognitive psychology is the study of higher mental activities, such as attention, memory,
and thinking.
Finally, technological advances to enable imaging the brain and its functions have
led to a greater understanding of the physical basis underlying learning and memory,
12 Learning and Memory

or cognitive neuroscience. Cognitive neuroscience has the benefit of not necessarily

requiring subjects who have suffered brain injury in order to be studied, as neuropsy-
chology often does. For just the practical implications of being able to use healthy sub-
jects alone, cognitive neuroscience has generated a lot of excitement for its scientific
potential. Because it’s important to be able to see where the distinctions between each
approach lie, let’s take a closer look at each approach.

Social Learning
Social theories of learning advanced past behaviorism by including those aspects of
learning that involve the presence of other people, whether real or imagined. For exam-
ple, social comparison is the act of comparing how we performed to the performance
of others. From a strict behaviorist perspective, how others perform shouldn’t affect our
learning, but often it does. When the first exam scores of a class are handed out, people
will, sometimes quite surreptitiously, find a way to see how they did in relation to other
students. The comparison shouldn’t really matter, but it often does. If everyone received
a high score, then your score isn’t as revealing about your mastery of the material or
your capabilities in that area—-it just shows that as a whole, everyone understands the
material similarly. On the other hand, if you were the highest or lowest scorer in the
class, that tells you something about your situation as well.
A sense of fairness or equity can be quite important in situations in which we are
evaluated too. Did the students who put in a lot of time and effort on an assignment tend
to earn higher scores than those students who did not? Or do the results appear to be
independent of the effort people put in? Both situations send a message about the class.
Expectations also play a large role in motivation to learn and remember. When a
parent promises a reward to a child for earning high grades and then reneges on the
arrangement later, claiming to have forgotten, this broken promise is remembered.
How will the child respond to the next promise? How about a younger sibling, who has
watched this exchange play out? When people form expectations about the time and
effort involved in doing a task, they examine the outcome with a critical eye to see if it
matched what they were hoping for.
One major barrier to learning is the learner’s belief about whether or not material can
be learned at all. Our self-efficacy for the activity, the belief we have about our own ability
to perform a task, is highly predictive of whether we will attempt the task, how hard we
will persist, and how creative we are at completing it (Pajares & Urdan, 2006). If someone
does not believe he or she can accomplish a particular task, then why bother trying?
In sum, social learning theories are those that try to explain human behavior by
incorporating not just the component of thought but the social component as well.

Cognitive Psychology
Cognitive psychology is the study of higher mental activities. Cognitive psychology
encompasses all psychological research that involves the study of language, attention,
acquiring and representing knowledge in the mind, judgment, and decision making.
The overarching question of cognitive psychology might be, “How does the mind use
information?”
Cognitive psychologists often approach human learning and memory from the per-
spective of how people process information, information-processing theories, or how
people think about their own thinking, called “metacognition.” Of particular interest for
 CHAPTER 1 History of Learning and Memory 13

us is how people try to control their own learning and assess their own memory abilities,
a subfield known as metamemory.

Information-Processing Theories
A long-standing, fundamental assumption in cognitive psychology is that we can approach
the human mind as a high-powered computer, examining its capacity, speed, and abili-
ties in a fairly similar way to how one might talk about technical specification of some
hardware for sale in a store. How much can we remember? What helps us to store more
information? What helps us to remember, and what gets in our way when we can’t? In the
past, the information-processing approach was the only option for studying memory in
people with normal functioning, since the brain imaging technology simply wasn’t devel-
oped enough to answer the questions people had. Nowadays this approach often works
in tandem with the cognitive neuroscience approach.
Hermann Ebbinghaus (1850–1909) was a pioneer in this approach to mental activity.
He took the study of learning and memory from the realm of philosophers and moved
it into the realm of psychological science. Adopting an attitude that remains prevalent
in psychology today, he explored learning and memory by collecting data on how well
people can perform a task, instead of solely theorizing about it. Ebbinghaus’s methods
are fairly simple by today’s standards, but his approach was thorough enough that his
results provided insights that are still talked about today. Briefly, Ebbinghaus used
lists of “nonsense syllables” in a consonant-vowel-consonant pattern as the stimuli to
memorize and try to recall later, such as CEG, TIB, and PAH (Ebbinghaus, 1885/1964).
He would monitor how many tries it took to learn a list of nonsense syllables and quiz
himself over a period of days to track his forgetting. We’ll return to Ebbinghaus and his
work in Chapter 7.
Today, modern memory researchers often rely on three key functions or processes to
describe aspects of human memory (see Fig. 1.8). Encoding is the act of sensing some
stimuli in our environment, like light or sound, and extracting the meaning from it in
your mind. An example is sensing the shape, color, and texture of an object in a park-
ing lot and then realizing that it is a car that is moving toward you too quickly to be
safe. Encoding is a critical process if we are encountering something for the first time.
Storing is the act of retaining information for a period of time. The information can come
in many forms, including images, knowledge, impressions, and feelings. The duration of
time can be relatively short, such as a second or two, or it could be a lifetime. As we move
forward through this book, we will encounter many instances of memory researchers
attempting to study what kinds of information we store, where in the brain, and how the
information is organized in the mind. Retrieval is the act of attempting to remember
some information. Often researchers are interested in trying to understand why some
memories are easily recalled, whereas other memories are not. Often researchers will
use the word cues for those hints that we use to try to retrieve a particular memory, like
the search term we might enter into a search engine to find a website.

FIGURE 1.8   The three key processes

Encoding Storing Retrieval

14 Learning and Memory

FIGURE 1.9   Diagram of basic Atkinson-Shiffrin model

Sensory Short-term Long-term

Memory Memory Memory

So, when watching a movie for the first time, we can expect a fair amount of encod-
ing the characters and the plot of the movie, and storing the parts that really caught our
attention. Later, we can retrieve some of that information when a friend asks what the
movie was like. If these three processes sound like using a computer—that is, entering
information, saving a document, and later, opening the file again—that’s by design. This
analogy of the mind as a computer has been a tremendous benefit to memory research
and has stimulated much work and theory over the past few decades.
One particular model of how human memory works emerged from verbal learning
research in the 1960’s and became so well known that it has been called the “modal”
model of memory, meaning the most commonly talked about and referenced. While it
is not an active focus of research today, the terms used in this model are now a part of
our cultural vernacular. The Atkinson-Shiffrin model (Atkinson & Shiffrin, 1968; see
Fig. 1.9), named after the people who described it, claims that memory for some stimu-
lus or information will reside in one of three states: a sensory buffer, a short-term mem-
ory store, or long-term memory. The sensory buffer is essentially the beginning of the
encoding process as a person registers some stimulus within his or her sense systems,
such as a voice, and the information is briefly held. Should attention be given to that
particular sensation, it will move into what was called short-term memory, where it can
be kept mentally active for as long as desired by continually thinking about it. Finally,
with enough continual thinking, it could end up being stored for a long period of time,
in long-term memory.
Besides its general popularity, the Atkinson-Shiffrin model is a good example of many
information-processing theories. First, information is assumed to pass through stages,
sequentially. Additionally, these theories may not necessarily be expected or required
to have direct mapping onto parts of the brain. These kinds of models are meant to be
diagrams of abstract functioning that people seem to do when they think. Of primary
interest to cognitive psychologists is what information a person uses when he or she
wrestles with an important decision. The mechanics of brain functioning are usually of
secondary interest.
The Atkinson-Shiffrin model is still a useful framework for talking about human
memory in broad terms. Most, if not all, modern research today targets particular mem-
ory phenomena more specifically than this model. Essentially, the field has incorporated
it and moved beyond it.

Metamemory Awareness and Strategies

Metamemory is part of an area in cognitive psychology called metacognition, or
thinking about one’s own thinking. Metamemory includes the acts of knowing what
our strengths are for learning and remembering and strategies we might use to help
us study. It includes knowing when to stop studying material because we have learned
something well enough, as well as when to stop because of frustration. It is an activity
we do all the time, yet we may not realize it. Mental activities such as deciding whether
 CHAPTER 1 History of Learning and Memory 15

we are better at spelling than grammar, or that to study for a history quiz you need to
make flashcards, or that you might have to email the professor to ask for more time on
your paper are all examples of thinking about your own thinking in order to decide what
to do next. Whenever we are making judgments about different strategies we could use
for handling a situation or problem, we are thinking metacognitively.
Miller, Galanter, and Pribram’s (1960) test-operate-test-exit model (TOTE) was the
model of metacognition that broke cleanly away from behaviorist approaches to learn-
ing and remembering. Behaviorists had assumed that learning was primarily a matter
of learning a particular response to some external stimulus; little or no evaluation or
thought was required on the part of the individual at all. The TOTE model claims that
what people do when engaging in an activity is to see whether the situation is currently
what we want (a “test”), then make a change (“operate”), check again to see if we have
arrived at the goal state (another “test”), and if so, leave this process (“exit”). This is
repeated as long as necessary. For example, when using an automatic car wash, the act
of driving the car to the right spot within the facility (where the front tires stop at the
bumper and the electric signs change to a red “STOP”) requires some monitoring: “Am
I there yet? How about now?” TOTE models metacognitive activity. It’s easy to imagine
how the TOTE model might be used while learning. “Do I understand this chapter?”
or “How much of this to I need to memorize?” or “What really are the main points of
this section?” are all metacognitive questions relating to memory and are metamemory
questions.
Flavell, Friedrichs, and Hoyt coined the term “metamemory” in 1970. Research
questions for metamemory studies include investigating people’s confidence for learning
material. Are we ever too confident? What strategies, if any, do people use to remember
important information? How does our ability to judge our memories change from child-
hood, to adulthood, to old age? Any time you talk to other students about strategies for
succeeding in a particular class or for a particular assignment, metamemory is involved.

Cognitive Neuroscience
Research into the mechanics of the brain and nervous system, essentially the hardware
that “runs” the human mind, has continued well past the techniques Descartes used.
Instead of exclusively relying on patients or animals who had suffered injuries, research-
ers can now take images of the brain in action. Neuroscientists study the brain at the
cellular and molecular levels in order to describe theoretical, metabolic structures of the
brain that give rise to different brain functions. Neuroscientists focus on (1) neurons, the pri-
mary building blocks of the central nervous system; (2) the gaps between the neurons; and
(3) the chemicals that are used to facilitate communication between neurons.
Neuroscientists use a variety of techniques. The use of neuroimaging to see the
brain as it operates is relatively new, but it has much potential for altering the course of
study for learning and memory research. Sometimes neuroscientists will activate single
neurons to study how they behave, a technique called single-cell recording—although
usually their focus is on how groups of neurons work together. In some studies, mind-
altering drugs are used to study how neurons communicate across synapses.

Integrating the Approaches

A major challenge for psychologists and neuroscientists has been attempting to integrate
across fields. Social learning and cognitive psychology research have been mutually rein-
forcing, since both use behavioral assessments for data, and researchers in each area have
16 Learning and Memory

similar training. Neuroscience and cognitive psychology have been more challenging to
integrate, for philosophical and practical reasons, which are discussed next.
Descartes’s theorizing about the mind-body problem has had one unexpected rami-
fication. By conceptually splitting the functions of the “mind” from the actions of the
“body” and hence the brain, psychologists have pursued describing the mind in their
own fashion while cognitive neuroscientists have pursued documenting brain activity in
theirs. One major issue stemming from these two focal areas is that cognitive psycholo-
gists and neuroscientists tend to have different educational backgrounds and training.
This is a broad generalization, but neuroscientists approach the study of the brain from
a metabolic “systems” perspective. They are looking to see what the neural underpin-
nings of mental activities are by identifying where they are housed and how those mental
activities are supported. Cognitive psychologists, while interested in the neural basis for
their theories, tend to take a “process” approach—looking for theories that focus on how
the mind allows people to function. Today, with the ability to image the brain, there is a
greater desire to map or connect cognitive models of learning and memory to an under-
lying neural structure. This has presented new challenges in the incongruence between
how the two camps study and theorize about their ideas.
Consider the Atkinson-Shiffrin model of memory stores, described above. This model
of cognitive processes behind memory has similarities with other cognitive models (Weldon,
1999). The flow of information through the model is sequential. That is, information works
in a stepwise fashion. Information is stored in one stage at a time, and not spread out
across different stages simultaneously. Information is transferred from one stage to the
next, computationally, as a computer might be programmed to do. This model is primarily
constructed to describe at an abstract level the functioning that should be going on in the
mind based on behavioral data. No assumptions about the biology underneath the model
are claimed.
For a period of time, cognitive neuroscientists were hoping to find one-to-one con-
nections between the models that cognitive psychologists were creating and their own
findings. But our understanding of the brain has evolved in the past several decades
quickly. While the psychological functioning of the brain can be described in sequen-
tial models like the Atkinson-Shiffrin model, the mechanical functioning of the brain
itself isn’t sequential or as easily compartmentalized as cognitive models tend to be. The
brain is a fairly dynamic and interconnected processing machine, which makes finding
a neural basis for sequential, stage-like cognitive theories difficult, if not completely
impossible.
So, the role that neuroscience plays in psychological science and the relationship
between it and cognitive psychology are still being clarified. Perhaps the cognitive psy-
chologists are best at identifying what the mind does, and the neuroscientists uncover
how the brain affords what the mind can do. Some cognitive psychologists believe that
the behavioral research that they do must come first, with the neuroscience following it
later (Toth & Hunt, 1999).
Overall, neuroscience techniques are contributing to psychological science in three
major ways. First, human abilities to learn and remember can be mapped to specific parts
of the brain, documenting the mechanisms behind existing theories. Second, neurosci-
ence techniques can provide constraints or limits to existing theories. Using behavioral
research, such as experiments, psychologists are relatively free to propose whatever
brain functioning they might imagine is operating behind a particular theory. With neuro-
science evidence, it’s possible to find that a theory is either physically impossible or that
the brain is not activating in accordance to the theory, which is fairly strong evidence that
 CHAPTER 1 History of Learning and Memory 17

FIGURE 1.10   The four primary approaches to learning, with a biological

basis underneath

Cognitive Behavioral

Affective Social

Biological

the theory is flawed. Third, neuroscience techniques can be used to generate new theories
of human functioning based on patterns of brain activity that existing theory may not
have accounted for.
This simple diagram may help clarify matters when thinking about the state of psy-
chological science. There have been four general approaches or “frames” to the study
of human and animal behavior in psychology. Psychologists approach human behavior
from either behavioral, cognitive, social, or affective perspectives (see Fig. 1.10). Each of
these approaches dictates the pertinent variables of interest and occasionally the most
preferred kinds of research. There are no firm boundaries between them; each acts as a
kind of shorthand for grouping related theories and concepts.
Behavioral approaches to learning focus solely on the actual movements of a learner.
Social learning takes into account the presence of others and to whom we give the
credit for our learning (ourselves or the situation). Cognitive theories of learning focus
entirely on the mental processing that occurs to encode, retain, and retrieve information.
Emotions and our motivations play a clear role in learning as well. Underlying each of
these approaches, of course, are the biological structures that support the organism’s
capabilities.
Ultimately, each approach has strengths and limitations to what it can bring to
describe and explain the range of activities that make up what we call “learning.” In fact,
it’s not uncommon to see modern theories try to bridge more than one approach, and
they will often be called “social-cognitive” or “cognitive-behavioral” theories.

Themes in the Book

These themes will be reoccurring throughout the textbook, and they give an indication of
what we will find as we take a closer look at the immense amount of research on learning
and memory.

1. There are different kinds of learning (cognitive, behavioral, social), and our
emotions and motivations play a role in what we learn and store.
2. We are constantly learning, even when we are not aware of doing so. That is,
learning occurs at multiple levels of awareness.
3. The brain is the basis of and gives us several separate memory systems.
 18 Learning and Memory

4. Complex memories are stored all over the brain, across layers as well, not in any
one spot, or even in one system.
5. The human memory system’s best trait—learning the gist or “take away”
message of an event or some material—can be its biggest weakness.
6. The context of learning helps us to remember, but it can limit our ability to
recognize when our knowledge will be useful.

CHAPTER SUMMARY
Philosophers posited a number of ideas that are still with world instead, which means it is an interpretation and can
us today. One is the distinction between memories of sen- be inaccurate. William James defined memory as knowl-
sory experiences and abstract ideas. Some philosophers edge of an event that we currently do not have in conscious
proposed that the purpose or meaning of a particular awareness, and he used the term “traces” to describe the
object, its function, is what defines an object, more than paths of memories across centers of the brain.
its actual structure. Ideas may be formed through the The approaches that will be the focus of this book
association or connection of several events or ideas to each are: behavioral theories of learning (Chapter 4),
other. Descartes was responsible for making the distinc- social learning theories that examine the role of
tion between the mind and the body, a distinction between others (Chapter 5), cognitive learning theories that
mental function and physical structure; but it was Kant take either an information-processing approach or
who reconnected them by explaining how the physical metamemory approach (Chapter 7), emotional and
form gives rise to the capabilities for mental abilities and motivational influences on learning and memory
understanding. Locke believed that all knowledge was (Chapter 6), and cognitive neuroscience attempts to
a combination of sensory experiences in some form; but account for the biological underpinnings of human
Kant asserted that we construct our understanding of the learning and memory (Chapter 3).

REVIEW QUESTIONS
1. Of the following philosophers, which do you think 4. How are social learning theories an advance from
were the most far apart in their views about behaviorism?
memory? Aristotle, Descartes, Locke.
5. What is the single defining idea behind an
2. Which of the philosophers seemed to represent the “information-processing” approach to learning and
most contemporary view of what you know about memory?
learning and memory so far?

3. What is the single defining idea behind “behaviorism”

and its approach to learning and memory?
 CHAPTER 1 History of Learning and Memory 19

KEY TERMS
Associationism 8 Encoding 13 Retrieval 13
Behavioral theories Equity 12 Schema 9
of learning 18 Expectations 12 Self-efficacy 12
Behaviorism 11 Functions 4 Similarity, contiguity 5
Causal properties 5 Information-processing Single-cell recording 15
Cognitive learning theories 12 Social cognitive theory 11
theories 18 Map 16 Social comparison 12
Cognitive neuroscience 12 Metacognition 14 Social learning theories 18
Cognitive psychology 11 Metamemory 14 Social learning theory 11
Emotional and motivational Mind-altering drugs 15 Stimulus-response associations 11
influences 18 Neuroimaging 15 Storing 13
Empiricist 8 Neuropsychology 7 Traces 10

FURTHER RESOURCES
•• Weblink: A large collection of materials about and •• Weblink: B. F. Skinner, Interviews on YouTube
by William James {{ https://www.youtube.com/watch?=xjiXX418MMk&
{{ http://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Pajares/james.html list=PL19011A6D1D5C7638&index=8
•• Weblink: The William James Society
{{ http://society.wjsociety.org

REFERENCES
Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). Human memory: A Pajares, F., & Urdan, T. C. (Eds.). (2006). Self-efficacy beliefs
proposed system and its control processes. In K. W. Spence & of adolescents. Information Age Publishing. Retrieved from
J. T. Spence (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motiva- https://www.amazon.com/Self-Efficacy-Beliefs-Adolescents-
tion (Vol. 2, pp. 89–195). Oxford, England: Academic Press. Adolescence-Education/dp/1593113668#reader_1593113668
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079–7421(08)60422–3
Toth, J. P., & Hunt, R. R. (1999). Not one versus many, but
Ebbinghaus, H. (1964). On memory. New York, NY: Dover. zero versus any: Structure and function in the context of the
(Original work published 1885) multiple memory systems debate. In J. K. Foster & M. Jelicic,
Memory: Systems, process, or function? (pp. 232−272). New
Flavell, J. H., Friedrichs, A. G., & Hoyt, J. D. (1970).
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Developmental changes in memorization processes.
Cognitive Psychology, 1, 324–340. Weldon, M. S. (1999). The memory chop shop: Issues in the
search for memory systems. In J. K. Foster & M. Jelicic,
James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology (Vol. 1). New
Memory: Systems, process, or function? (pp. 162–204). New
York, NY: Holt.
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Miller, G. A., Galanter, E., & Pribram, K. H. (1960). The
unit of analysis. In Plans and the structure of behavior
(pp. 21–39). New York, NY: Holt.
 CHAPTER

©iStock.com/andresr

Common Research Methods

in Learning and Memory

Chapter Outline
•• Learning Objectives •• Surveys and Interviews
•• Overview •• Memory Diaries
•• Common Features •• Experiments
{{ Performance Tasks •• Issues of Quality
•• Chapter Summary
¡¡Selective Interference Tasks
•• Review Questions
{{ Performance Measurement •• Key Terms
¡¡Accuracy •• Further Resources
¡¡Efficiency •• References
¡¡Metamemory Judgments
¡¡Brain Functioning
22 Learning and Memory

Learning Objectives
1. Identify the common features of learning and memory studies (e.g., performance tasks and
performance measurements).
2. Define and distinguish between the three common approaches to the empirical study of
learning and memory.
3. Describe the characteristics that can be used to evaluate the quality of a study.

Overview
Today, psychological researchers collect evidence to support their ideas. It’s no longer
enough to have a belief about how some phenomenon works; the researcher has to con-
duct some kind of study that carefully examines the acts of learning and memory. In
addition, how a researcher goes about collecting data, as well as how the data can be
interpreted, are held to high levels of scrutiny. The manner in which a researcher con-
ducted a study should be documented and reported well enough for someone else to
replicate. Outside factors that may have altered the data should be either eliminated or
controlled, or at least documented. Researchers are expected to interpret the trends in
the data they collect quite conservatively, and not to use the data to allege results for
which they did not truly have support.
But what is the relevance for looking specifically at research methodology for a
student of the field? First, knowing the methodology a field uses tells us a lot about
that field itself. Fields are not defined just by their chosen topics of interest, but by the
accepted techniques, the tools of the trade. What do the professionals in this field study?
How do they usually collect evidence to support their ideas? How do they analyze what
they find?
Second, it is wise in our modern society to have some idea of what high qual-
ity research in the social sciences should be like. We are bombarded with supposed
research “findings,” such as “Oreos May Be as Addictive as Cocaine” (Locker, 2013).
If true, these study results are a big deal, and might cause people to change how
they conduct their lives. For most of our adult lives, we don’t have experts on hand
who have spent time studying the field and watching trends to put new findings into
context. We are largely left on our own to reflect on scientific news reports that will
be written by people who may have extensive, minimal, or no research training at
all. With easy access to content on the Internet, our exposure to research of variable
quality and questionable expert opinion is higher than ever before. It’s not unheard of
for established media outlets to favor some results over others, or alternatively, for an
outlet to favor results that sound outrageous over the normal, routine progress that
scientists usually make. So, it’s important to know something about what constitutes
good social science research just to help us all become more critical of the various
“findings” we’ll be exposed to by the media, as well as those shared by our friends and
colleagues.
Finally, you may find that you need to conduct a study yourself, whether for a class,
your program, or for an employer. Many of the kinds of studies we will be discussing
in this textbook are relatively inexpensive to conduct. Often it’s a matter of carefully
 CHAPTER 2 Common Research Methods in Learning and Memory 23

thinking through how to go about it. Many classic studies in memory and cognitive
psycho­logy are remarkably inexpensive and do not require expensive equipment, but
they are important in terms of findings.
In fact, you may find that you need to examine yourself and your own habits at some
point: A self-study is never a bad idea. For example, take a moment to consider this ques-
tion: How many hours (or minutes) a week do you spend studying for your classes? Be
honest: Is the number you arrived at an intuition, or can you document it? Which days
of the week, typically? Do you distribute your time equally across all subjects? People
often vastly overestimate the amount of time they spend on a project. It happens to
all of us: Boice (1990) found college professors believe they work an average of 60 hours a
week, but their own logs showed it to be an average of 29 hours a week. Self-studies such
as keeping a log or diary can be very informative about our real habits and patterns, and
can be the first step to improving our lives. They are a kind of research study, one that is
conducted with one subject—you.
In this chapter, we’ll look at features that are common to virtually all social science
studies, and then take a look at some research methods that are unique to learning and
memory studies.

Common Features
Nearly every study will involve the participants performing some task and will collect
some data about their performances. Let’s look at each in turn.

Performance Tasks
The performance task is exactly what it sounds like. The participants are observed doing
what they are expected to do, such as reading an essay, studying a list of words, or solv-
ing a puzzle. The performance task in a study is usually easy to spot because it is what
each participant was asked to do. In the field of learning and memory, often the perfor-
mance task is to encourage people to learn and remember some action or material so the
researcher can test a hypothesis. The performance task will nearly always involve being
exposed to some stimulus of interest, perhaps a list of words. The words will have been
chosen for a particular reason, such as their differences in length, or how they vary in
their emotionality (e.g., “COTTON” vs. “VOMIT”). Perhaps the expectation is that the
participants will have stronger memories of them later, or perhaps they will bypass them
more readily and forget them.
To get some idea of what happens with memorization over time, the participants
might have to repeat the task several times, perhaps with different lists of words.
Alternatively, they might have to look at some pictures and arrive at a quick judgment
about them in order to give an answer. The time it takes to respond tells the researcher
something about how difficult the task was to perform. To repeat, the performance
task in a study is usually easy to locate because it is what each participant was asked
to do.
There are a wide variety of performance tasks that are used in learning and memory
research. Just to familiarize you with a few, some common performance tasks that assess
memory for knowledge are word lists, cue-target word lists, and implicit learning tasks.
When participants are asked to memorize word lists, the participants are usually well
aware of the task at hand and know they are to try their hardest. The lists are usually
 24 Learning and Memory

constructed primarily to answer questions about the raw power of human memory as
well as where difficulties might lie. Do people have more or less trouble memorizing
words that are concrete versus abstract (“APPLE” vs. “JUSTICE”)? Does the length of
the word matter for how easy it is to memorize? How many words can the average adult
memorize correctly? Some tests for Alzheimer’s patients will use a learning list task
consisting of only three words. To have memory difficulties with a list of only three items
is considered to be quite severe.
Hermann Ebbinghaus was the first to develop lists of verbal stimuli for the purpose
of examining how people learn and how much they can memorize. Using fake syllabi,
three letters in length, all in a consonant-vowel-consonant format, he found that the more
time he spent studying a particular list, the better he was able to recall it later. His total
time hypothesis claims that how well one can remember information depends primarily
on how long one has spent studying it.
Ebbinghaus also was able to track the decline of memory. That is, by studying a fixed
list of nonsense syllables and testing himself on it repeatedly, he could monitor his rate of
forgetting. He found that once he had fully memorized a list, he forgot most of it within
an hour. What information did remain after the initial period of forgetting tended to last
for quite a long time, up to a month. Ebbinghaus’ graph of his results, or forgetting
curve, indicates that what we learn is either forgotten quickly, or it lasts quite a while
(see Fig. 2.1).
Mary Whiton Calkins (1863–1930), the first woman to complete the work for a PhD
in psychology at Harvard (but not the first woman to be awarded a doctorate there)
and the first woman president of the American Psychological Association, provided a
novel approach to the use of memorized lists of words to study learning and memory.
Calkins (1898) pioneered the paired-associate technique to examine the associations
between stimuli. In this technique, participants study pairs of stimuli, such as numbers
and colors. When being tested, one stimuli from each pair is given as a hint or “cue” for
the “target” stimuli to be recalled later. When used with verbal stimuli, the participants
memorize a list of cue and target words they will be tested on later. In other words,
instead of just memorizing “BEACH TABLE BLOCKS,” participants will cue words
for each, such as “sun-BEACH fable-TABLE
water-BLOCKS.” Then, when being quizzed,
the participant will be given the cue words
FIGURE 2.1   Typical curve of forgetting only (sun, fable, and water).
Why was this an important develop-
100%
ment? The cue words meant it was now pos-
sible to test the kinds of connections people
made when studying the material. For
example, seeing “sun” and trying to remem-
Retained

ber “BEACH” is a kind of conceptual con-

nection: the two are commonly experienced
together. For “TABLE,” the cue word “fable”
is not generally associated with it, but they
do rhyme. In the last case, there is no normal
0% association between “water” and “BLOCKS.”
1 1 1 A list of cue-target words of this kind would
hour day month allow for a comparison between using hints
Time that rhyme versus hints to the meaning of a
word. Calkins’s invented technique allowed
 CHAPTER 2 Common Research Methods in Learning and Memory 25

for a new kind of experimental manipulation—using the relationship (or lack thereof)
between the cue and target words to see which kinds of relationships are beneficial for
memory. The assumption underlying this technique is that the stronger the association,
the more important that kind of learning is for the human memory system.

Selective Interference Tasks

A variant on tests of the raw power of memory and its limitations is when the researcher
wants to try to selectively interfere with some part of memory performance. The idea
behind attempting to interfere with performance is to find out what the mental processes
that support memory are. An analogy would be trying to find out why the car stopped
running. A number of actions might be tried to figure out what is going on “inside” the
engine, such as turning the key in the ignition and listening for a click, checking the elec-
tricity, and looking at the fuel gauge.
The memory researcher attempts to interfere with a select part of the memory pro-
cess by including a dual task, a secondary task that the participants have to complete
at the same time. The researcher would be examining whether or not the dual task
slowed down or interfered with the primary performance task. For example, to find
out the extent to which language and speech sounds make up memories when study-
ing a list of words, a researcher could either play audio of a speech in native language
while participants are trying to study or play an instrumental song instead. The dual
task may be to simply ignore the additional audio as much as possible. The extent to
which the speech interfered with the activity of memorizing would give some idea of
what extent the act of memorizing words relied on speech sounds. If the to-be-ignored
speech made memorizing a list of words difficult, then the act of memorizing words
must be very phonetic in nature; if the additional speech had little or no effect on
memorizing words, then memorizing words might be more visual in nature, or rely on
some other kind of encoding.
Implicit learning tasks are memory tasks that expose the participant to some stim-
ulus without being explicitly told to study it. Implicit tasks are used when the researcher
wants to know to what extent people can learn a pattern or pick up a skill with little or
no awareness. The participant might be exposed to words flashed on a screen too briefly
to notice consciously and then quizzed on them later. Or, stimuli might be arranged in a
particular order to see if the participant can learn the sequence without knowing. These
tasks test for implicit learning, meaning information that is presented without con-
scious awareness on the part of the participant. Much research has been conducted on
the intentional kinds of memory tasks that people choose to engage in during normal
life: actively trying to remember phone numbers, passwords, postal codes, routes, and
grocery items. But people learn information incidentally as well. Simply by living out
our day we encounter a large amount of stimuli that we may remember, if even weakly.
Certainly a lot of advertisers believe this kind of spurious exposure to information about
products is helpful. (Essentially, implicit memory tasks are a kind of secondary task of
which the participant is not aware.)

Performance Measurement
If participants are being asked to perform some task, then some aspect of the perfor-
mance will need to be measured. Like performance tasks, measurements of performance
can vary widely. Here are four general kinds that we will encounter repeatedly in this
26 Learning and Memory

text: rates of correct/incorrect answers, reaction times, metamemory judgments, and

brain activity. Let’s look at each of these in turn.

Accuracy
If a goal of the human memory system is to store information for retrieval later, then
looking at how well participants learned information under various conditions will
likely require calculating the number of correct answers, usually calculated as a per-
cent correct. While the percent correct is certainly an important measure, a parallel
but not identical measure is the number of errors, usually calculated as a percent
incorrect. Some conditions might cause people to remember information incorrectly,
such as situations in which all of the answers provided on a multiple-choice question
look generally familiar, or when a lot of time has passed since learning some material.
A researcher can find that a particular recall technique designed to boost recall cre-
ates more correct answers and more incorrect answers as well. This means that the
memory boost was coming at a cost of remembering false information too, which is not
usually desired.
In some cases, they will be asked to recall the information, and in other cases, they
will be asked to recognize the information. In a recall test, the participants have to
generate their answer completely, like an essay exam or fill-in-the-blanks test question.
Hints or cues may or may not be provided, and participants may be asked to recall them
in the order they were learned, or in any order. Imagine, as in Nickerson and Adams
(1979), being handed a page with two circles on it and being asked to draw the front
and back sides of a penny from memory as completely and accurately as possible. In a
recognition test, participants can pick from a display of options. The order of the options
may be jumbled or randomized, but usually the correct answer is provided in the display.
Multiple-choice questions are a recognition test; a line of mug shots (a photo array) also
tests for recognition. This difference of recall tests being more difficult than recognition
tests is interpreted as recall tests assessing memory strength more accurately, since the
correct answer is not provided as a cue. There are many research findings that appear
to apply only to recall tests, and not to recognition tests. This indicates that the effect
being studied is going to present itself under one circumstance: when the correct answer
is not provided but must be generated. Consider how you have to study for an essay exam
versus a multiple-choice exam.

Efficiency
Another common dependent variable is how long the participants took to complete the
task, or reaction time (sometimes referred to as response latency). The basic assump-
tion is that the faster a correct response is, then the more efficient the processing must
be. It’s a metric to measure cognitive effort and was initially known as “mental chro-
nometry.” F. C. Donders (1868), a Dutch psychologist, created a system for measuring
mental events in the late nineteenth century. A researcher compares the reaction time of
a simple stimulus, like a light, to different tasks and makes comparisons about the mental
workload involved with each mental event.
Reaction time measurements are common with implicit memory tasks, since the
researcher cannot ask a direct question about something the participant was exposed to
without her awareness. The goal is to evaluate the participant’s performance in familiar
situations, even though the participant doesn’t remember being exposed to the situation
before.
 CHAPTER 2 Common Research Methods in Learning and Memory 27

In some cases, reaction time measurements are used to evaluate what people have
learned about issues that are politically and culturally sensitive, topics that are difficult
to directly question people about. Essentially, these techniques assess prior learning that
occurred outside of a formal research environment. In the late 1970s and 1980s, public
awareness of sexual violence against women increased, with planned marches such as
“Take Back the Night” and other organized activities. Public discourse over what con-
stituted sexual aggression, sexual harassment, or just poor social skills continued for
over a decade. The discourse included mainstream movies such as The Accused starring
Jodi Foster (Jaffe & Lansing, 1988) that depicted a gang rape at a bar. Public attention
reached a crescendo with the infamous “Tailhook Scandal,” in which a large group of
Navy airmen were accused of sexually assaulting women and some men at a convention
in Las Vegas in 1991 (Winerip, 2013). Many Navy personnel were formally disciplined.
With this background in mind, some psychologists used an implicit task and reaction
times to better understand the thinking of people who are sexually aggressive. Bargh,
Raymond, Pryor, and Strack (1995) evaluated the role of power in the minds of sexually
aggressive men. As you might guess, it’s not satisfactory to simply interview them and
ask about a behavior that is clearly controversial in society, so an implicit task is used—
one that the participants won’t normally notice. In the first experiment reported in this
study, male undergraduates were seated at a computer screen and were asked to read a
word aloud as soon as they saw it. These words were selected for being generally—but
not specifically—sex-related, such as “bed” or “motel.” How long it took them to see
the word and start speaking the word was timed, making their dependent variable a
reaction time measure. The participants were not aware that another word was being
presented extremely rapidly beforehand and was being covered up or “masked” so they
could not consciously tell what it was. Some of the words were about physical power
(“strong,” “macho”) or authoritative power (“boss,” “control”). The researchers found
that those males who had been screened as high risk for sexual aggression and sexual
harassment would read the words out loud more quickly than did males who were not
high risk, when they had been unknowingly presented with power words. This difference
was interpreted as evidence that some men find the concept of “power” to be naturally
associated with the concept of “sex,” mentally. A second study found that only the sexual
aggressors were likely to rate a female confederate as more attractive as a result of the
power word priming.

Metamemory Judgments
Another kind of dependent variable is a metamemory judgment, that is, measurements
of the metamemory of the participants. Participants may be asked how how confident
they are in their answers, a confidence rating metamemory judgment. Confidence rat-
ings can be used to evaluate how accurate participants are in their own awareness of
their learning.
A researcher might ask the participant to consider how easy it will be to learn some
material in what is called an ease-of-learning (EOL) judgment. You may be aware of
making this judgment when you start reading a new chapter in a book. How difficult
to study does it appear to be? After studying for a while, participants might be asked
how certain they are that they know the material, a judgment-of-learning (JOL) esti-
mate. You probably make this judgment when you have decided that you have studied
for a particular chapter enough to move on to other things. Participants might be asked
whether they could come up with the answer to a question before taking the trouble of
28 Learning and Memory

answering it, a feeling-of-knowing (FOK) judgment. As a student, you engage in these

judgments all the time; you may have found that these metamemory judgments are what
have enabled you to get this far in your studies. Imagine when you turn to some reading
that you are required to do for a class. Initially you will make a snap judgment as to how
difficult it looks and how ready you feel to take it on, an EOL judgment. After reading
for a while, you will occasionally stop and consider whether you comprehend the material
enough that you can proceed, a JOL judgment. Later, when the instructor asks the class
a question about the material, you will have a sense of “does the answer seem familiar,
and can I retrieve it if I try?”—a FOK judgment. Research on metamemory has exam-
ined how accurate we are in these judgments; as you might guess, we are not always
100 percent correct.

Brain Functioning
Several techniques have become fairly popular for examining the role of the brain and
central nervous system in supporting psychological phenomena. Since neuroscience
can be said to be concerned primarily with the systems of the brain, and cellular and
molecular activity, two general approaches have evolved for brain study: document-
ing brain structures and tracking brain activity. Documenting structural or anatomical
forms of the brain has been done using X-rays (computed tomography, or CT scans)
and sensing structures through magnetic fields and radio waves (magnetic resonance
imaging, or MRIs).
However, many disparate parts of the brain may be involved in higher-order func-
tioning like most forms of learning and memory. It’s of greater interest to see how the
brain functions metabolically to support these activities rather than the anatomical brain
structures themselves, so other techniques are necessary.
One way to monitor brain activity is to track the tiny waves of electricity that ema-
nate from the outer shell of the brain and can be sensed outside the skull, a technique
called electroencephalography or EEG. These electrical waves can be measured in
millivolts and plotted on a graph as a study participant engages in some activity, such as
reading or looking at pictures. Electrodes are placed on the participant’s head in order
to take these readings. As a measurement, the researcher can see which tasks provoke
more or less activity and roughly where the surges in brain waves occurred. EEG read-
ings (electroencephalograms) can be used to identify general areas of the brain where
activity is occurring. EEG readings are considered excellent for measuring brain activity
in real time.
Other approaches take advantage of the fact that the cellular activity behind thought
and thinking requires oxygen. Blood flows through the brain to the areas that require the
oxygen the blood brings with it, about 4 to 6 seconds after brain activity in a particular
region has started. Monitoring the blood flow in the brain gives an indication of where
brain activity is occurring in the brain. To evaluate the change in blood levels over time,
researchers generate two images of a participant: one image during a basic activity and
another during the performance task. The difference in brain activity between those
states is subtracted, pixel by pixel, to create a difference image. This difference image
shows the areas of the brain where new brain activity took place as the result of the par-
ticipant’s engaging in the performance task.
The two most common methods for making a difference image are positron emis-
sion tomography, or PET, and functional magnetic resonance imaging, or fMRI.
In both cases, blood levels in the brain are monitored before and during a performance
 CHAPTER 2 Common Research Methods in Learning and Memory 29

task to record where new brain activity occurs. With PET, the participant ingests a
small amount of a low-level radioactive substance that integrates into the blood stream.
This radioactive substance is monitored as it courses through the brain during the
performance task.
The fMRI is generally preferred over the PET because it doesn’t require ingesting
any kind of substance. Instead of monitoring for the presence of a radioactive substance,
fMRI monitors the change in oxygen levels in the brain and hence the presence of blood,
which is an indirect measure of brain activity.
To sum up, usually the dependent (measured) variable will be a percent correct, a
percent incorrect, or reaction times. Other studies will use metamemory judgments to
see how people evaluate their own learning and memories. Modern brain imaging has
led to another kind of dependent variable, letting neuroscientists understand more about
the system underlying the experience of learning and memory. In many modern studies,
there are several dependent variables used together to create a more precise “profile”
of the performance of the participants.
Let’s look at the three major research designs used in learning and memory next.

Surveys and Interviews

One way to find out how people learn and about their memories is simply to ask them.
This is often done using questionnaires or surveys and, sometimes, with interviews.
Regardless of the format, simply asking people has a number of advantages. It is rela-
tively inexpensive to do, particularly online, and can be a very quick way to gather data.
A researcher can ask people what tricks they use to try to use to help their memory, and
why they think they remember better in some occasions than in others.
Probably the first published report using an interview to evaluate memory was by
James M. Cattell (1895). He asked students questions about historical events, what they
remembered from a lecture a week before, and the previous week’s weather. Often the
students added new information to the lecture that had not been presented. He found
that of fifty-six students, only seven remembered having had snow the week before.
Cattell took these results as a bad sign for how reliable memory really was.
The major strengths of the survey and interview method are that they are fast and
inexpensive. In some situations, surveying people about what they remember is the only
option. For example, to study the vivid memories people form after a catastrophic event
like a natural disaster, a memory researcher may whip together a set of questions about
the disaster that can be delivered to students the next time class meets. This has been
done numerous times to study “flashbulb memories” (Brown & Kulik, 1977), those vivid,
emotional memories of major events in our lives. It’s not in the researcher’s power to
create a natural disaster. There is no manipulation, and groups of people cannot be ran-
domly assigned. So this approach is nonexperimental in nature. The researcher has to
wait for something highly newsworthy and monumental to occur, such as an assassina-
tion of a national figure or an earthquake, before creating a survey. After some period of
time, for example, three months or perhaps three years, the researchers will contact as
many of the survey respondents as possible for a follow-up interview to see if they still
remember the event in the same way. Neisser and colleagues (1996) surveyed groups of
college students after an earthquake near San Francisco in 1989. Some of the students
experienced the earthquake personally, others lived nearby, and others only heard about
it on the news. The researchers conducted follow-up interviews a year and a half later to
see if the accuracy changed depending on proximity to the event.
30 Learning and Memory

It’s critical that surveys of what people remember attempt to validate the truthful-
ness, or veracity, of what is recalled. What people remember does not always correspond
to what actually occurred. Bahrick, Hall, and Berger (1996) asked roughly 100 under-
graduates what their grades were in each of their core high school classes for all four
years. With the students’ permission, Bahrick and colleagues checked the 3,220 recalled
grades with their high school transcripts and found about 29 percent of the remembered
grades were incorrect. Usually the inaccurate grades were inflated.
The convenience and low-cost benefits of simply asking people about their memories
is balanced by a number of disadvantages. First, people don’t necessarily answer ques-
tions honestly, particularly if they know that their answers will not be verified. They
may feel pressure to respond a certain way even when the interviewer doesn’t mean to
apply any.
What are the ways in which someone’s report about their own learning and memory
be inaccurate? In some cases, people may misremember because of their own internal
expectations. Conway and Ross (1984) demonstrated this by asking a set of randomly
selected college students interested in a study skills course to evaluate their study skills
before the course began. After the several-week course was over, the students who took
the class were asked how their study skills were at that time and to recall what their
study skills had been like before taking the class. All of the participants reported that
their study skills had improved, but in reality, they were reporting the same level of study
skills as they had before the course began. They were, after the class, misremembering
their study skills before the class. They downgraded their own earlier impressions of
themselves in order to see the class as beneficial! Even without external pressure to
please others, we may presumably seek to please ourselves and to help ourselves feel like
the activities we engage in are good uses of our time.
A second problem for surveys of learning and memory is that people may not know
how good or bad their memories truly are relative to those of other people. Our atti-
tudes toward our own memory may not be very accurate. Someone who is actually quite
forgetful may feel she has a strong memory, since she doesn’t remember all the times
she forgets. Preschoolers are remarkably confident about their memories, even when
they are aware that they are not perfect at a memorization task (Flavell, Friedrichs, &
Hoyt, 1970). Conversely, older adults often feel sensitive to memory decline with age and
will take steps to help themselves. Ironically, for healthy older adults, their true rate of
forgetting is often about the same as other adults (Herrmann, 1982). In a review of the
literature, Herrmann found that while people’s beliefs about their own memories are
stable over time, they are not necessarily accurate. Most studies found only a weak rela-
tionship between people’s beliefs about their memories and their actual ability to remem-
ber. When we survey people for their memory performance, we are most likely assessing
their attitudes about their own memory, rather than how effective their memory is.
Finally, some functions of the human learning system are not entirely within our
awareness. We can do some activities so quickly that not much conscious awareness, if
any, is required. Looking around and taking in what we see happens so quickly that most
of us can’t report the psychological processing going on at the same time. I personally
was once interviewed about my choice of detergent as I was leaving a grocery store.
The activity of picking it out had been so quick—it was such a minor decision to me—I
had no real memory of how I had made the decision. While I may know the outcome of a
decision, the process to arrive there may not be consciously available enough for me to
verbalize it. In many ways, it’s easier to consider the result or product of our thinking
rather than the process it took to get that result (White, 1988).
 CHAPTER 2 Common Research Methods in Learning and Memory 31

For a more powerful argument about the nature of learning and memory, it may be
necessary to go beyond diaries and surveys to manipulate some factor in order to see
what the consequences for learning are. In other words, an experiment is needed.

Memory Diaries
Some researchers have taken it upon themselves to study their own memories. This
involves keeping a diary, recording various events from their lives, and later on quizzing
themselves in some fashion.
This approach to memory is a little like a combination of field research and a case
study. No variables are intentionally manipulated, as the researcher simply records a
little about each day. Memory diaries are typically case studies, and often the researcher
is the only participant in the study. They are longitudinal studies, meaning that these
studies take place over long periods of time. Researchers will keep the memory diary
active for years. Linton (1982) collected six years’ worth of her own memories by writing
down two memories a day. She reread two of them each month, at random. She would try
to remember the events described, estimate their date, and try to put them in chronologi-
cal order. She rated each memory for how important it was as well as how emotional it
was, both when she wrote down the memory and when she recalled it. She experienced
two kinds of forgetting: in one, from repeating an event; in another, memories were sim-
ply lost. Repeating an event, such as trips to the same town to attend a conference, gen-
erated a series of memories that became indistinguishable from each other over time.
She was left with a generic, composite memory (e.g., “events that happened on my trips
to this town”) rather than specific event memories. She simply forgot about 30 percent of
the memories overall. For memories that were older than two years, it seemed easier for
her to try to remember them using a themed search (e.g., “parties I went to,” “sporting
events”) instead of a chronological search. She couldn’t find any relationship between
how important she had thought the memory was at the time or how emotional it was and
her ability to recall it later.
Diary studies have the particular advantage of being fairly lengthy, comprehen-
sive, and well within the control of the memory researcher. Of course, like any case
study, it’s hard to make broad conclusions from studies with only one subject. What if
a memory researcher happens to have an excellent memory, or is more interested in
the task simply because this is his or her area of study? Also, the participant is free to
select the memories he or she chooses to record, so there is a potential for selection
bias (a process for selecting items that is not truly random) in terms of which data
are collected.
Memory researchers have refined Linton’s techniques. Wagenaar (1986) kept a
record of one memory a day for six years. He categorized parts of each memory by who
was present, the time of day, where he was, and what the activity was. To evaluate the
issue of the diarist getting to select which memories to preserve, Brewer (1988) asked
college students to wear pagers that the research team would trigger by paging them at
random times. When the pagers went off, the students were to record what they were
doing, and thinking, and where they were. They also recorded a special memory from
each day, similar to what Linton and Wagenaar had done in their memory diary studies.
Weeks and months later, the participants were then quizzed to see what they remem-
bered of these incidental moments. As you might guess, the college students did not
remember nearly as many of these incidental memories as those they were allowed to
select out as important and to record.
32 Learning and Memory

Experiments
Experiments are by far the most common research design used in learning and memory
research. Experiments stand out from other general research techniques by their power
to provide explanations for why participants act a certain way. These causal explana-
tions are due to a unique feature of experimental research design—a controlled environ-
ment with one or more factors that the researcher intentionally manipulates.
All studies, whether surveys, diary studies, experiments, or any other method, will
include some form of data collection or measurement. In an experiment, this measured
variable is called the dependent variable. The power of experiments comes from the
use of an additional kind of variable that sets it apart—an independent variable. An
independent variable is a factor that is intentionally manipulated by the researcher. It
is a factor that the researcher suspects may cause a change in the performance of the
participants, so it will be used as a way to test for that connection or for a way to control
for it. Sometimes the researcher has a hypothesis and wants to see if she can success-
fully demonstrate a connection between an independent variable and performance on
the dependent variable; or it could be that there is a known connection already, so the
researcher uses the manipulation as a way to incorporate previous research and control
the effects of that variable.
Sometimes an independent variable may be quite subtle, and the participants won’t
even be aware of it. For example, a list of words that participants are required to memo-
rize and recall may contain concrete nouns (e.g., “house,” “book,” “couch”) and abstract
nouns (“justice,” “anger,” “smooth”). In some studies, a word is presented onscreen for
such a brief time (perhaps 80 milliseconds) that the participants don’t consciously see the
word; and the words used will vary on some dimension, such as calming versus upsetting
words (e.g., “quiet” and “slow” in contrast to “mold” and “vomit”).
Other times, independent variables are fairly obvious and clear, such as a memory
study involving some sort of psychoactive substance or medication. A number of studies
have attempted to determine whether taking ginkgo biloba is useful for remembering
(for a recent meta-analysis, see Laws, Sweetnam, and Kondel, 2012). Typically this will
involve having one set of participants take the medication for some period of time and
another set of participants who do not, the independent variable. Then, both sets are
given a memory task, and measurements are made. Often the participants who are not
taking the substance will be given a placebo, some substance that is not psychologically
active, like a sugar pill. In drug trials such as these, the participants and the researcher
will not know which participant is in which condition until the end of the study. The inde-
pendent variable creates different “conditions” for the performance task, and different
participants are placed into these different conditions, usually randomly.
Winograd and Soloway (1986) wanted to evaluate whether it was wise to store impor-
tant or valuable objects, like jewelry or cash, in unusual places. People going on a trip
may attempt to hide something important in case their home is broken into during the
trip. From the perspective of remembering, is this wise to do? In the first experiment
reported, Winograd and Soloway formed three groups of undergraduates. The three
groups studied a set of objects and their locations in different ways. One group examined
a set of sentences, such as “The jewelry is in the oven,” and “The lottery ticket is in the
sugar bowl”; and they rated each one for how memorable that location would be. Another
group of students rated each sentence for how likely it would be to store an object in that
unusual location. A third group was asked to mentally imagine storing those objects in
those locations. All three groups were asked to recall where each item was in a surprise
 CHAPTER 2 Common Research Methods in Learning and Memory 33

test. Winograd and Soloway found that the more unusual or unlikely a location was, the
less likely the participants would correctly recall the location. The researchers interpret
their findings as being unsupportive of the idea of hiding valuables in unusual places—
they are too easy to forget!
In this study, the independent variable is fairly easy to locate. There is one clear
manipulation, and the researchers created three groups of participants by asking each
group to study the material differently. “Study Method” would be an appropriate name
for this variable. In contrast to an independent (manipulated) variable, a dependent vari-
able does not split the participants into groups. Everyone in this study will be measured
along the same dimension—recall of location.
Experiments that split the participants into competing groups as Winograd and
Soloway (1986) did are called between-groups studies. The researcher is looking for
changes in the dependent variable(s) across the groups of participants that the indepen-
dent variable created. Other studies incorporate the independent variable differently:
The same set of participants will be asked to experience the performance task in each of
the different conditions of the independent variable. Experiments that use the partici-
pants in all conditions created by the independent variable are called within-subjects
studies. To see whether it mattered when students took notes by typing or handwriting,
Rudmann (2013) asked students to write down a list of words, take a test on those words,
then type a list of words, and receive a test on those words. This was then repeated
once. How many words they could remember whether they were handwriting or typ-
ing were compared. (They were statistically the same: handwriting or typing individual
words didn’t matter, according to this study.) In Rudmann’s study, the participants are
essentially competing against themselves under different circumstances. Their ability
to remember words was compared across the two conditions. Typically, within-subjects
studies require fewer participants, since the participants do the task repeatedly. Within-
subjects studies have an additional feature: Their findings can be viewed as more power-
ful because any differences were found for one set of individuals, instead of for different
groups of individuals, who may vary from each other naturally, as with between-groups
designs.
Despite the greater efficiency, not all hypotheses can be investigated using within-
subjects designs. Recall that before brain imaging techniques were as developed as they
are today, researchers studying the brain’s role in learning and memory had to use brain
damage as the primary method of uncovering what functions were associated with what
parts of the brain. This means either stimulating the brains of animals to create lesions,
a practice that dates back to Rene Descartes’s time, or finding people with pre-existing
brain damage for study, such as victims of car accidents. If a researcher is using brain
damaged patients as participants, then she will be using a between-groups design,
since it’s not possible to have the patients alternate from one group to the other (brain
damaged vs. non-brain damaged). This is a common issue for many variables that are
important in the social sciences, such as age, race, and sex. The researcher can use only
between-groups designs for those variables, despite the better efficiency of the within-
subjects designs.
Of course, some independent variables do not permit the random assignment that
would allow us to call them true independent variables. A researcher cannot randomly
assign people to a brain damaged group, or to one gender or the other, or to a particu-
lar age group. As a result, those kinds of independent variables are often called quasi-
independent variables, simply to denote to others that true random assignment was not
possible.
34 Learning and Memory

Ultimately, the true power of experimentation is the potential to produce a finding

that is a causal statement, such as “Talking on a cell phone while driving appears to
worsen a driver’s ability to see obstacles on the road” (Strayer, Drews, & Johnston, 2003;
Strayer & Johnston, 2001). The use of an independent variable sets it apart from all other
forms of research; and, for this reason, it is heavily favored by many researchers.
To sum up, we have reviewed three common research designs in learning and memory
research: surveys and interviews, diary studies, and experiments. Each has its individual
strengths and weaknesses. Surveys and interviews are inexpensive and quick to perform
but tend to reflect attitudes about learning and memory rather than actual learning.
Diary studies often have a good element of authentic realism, but are usually conducted
with only one person, the researcher, and can include only those memories that a person
consciously chooses to include. Experiments are the most powerful approach to provid-
ing explanations for how learning and memory work, but they require a high amount of
careful control and design in order to produce findings that others in the field can take
seriously.

Issues of Quality
Whenever we are presented with the results of a study, there are a number of possible
questions to consider when trying to address the quality of the study. No one study can
answer every question about a particular phenomenon. Ultimately, for any study, the
primary question is: Was the study convincing? To what extent were the researchers able
to support or debunk the hypothesis?
Here’s a recent example of a well-designed series of studies that is very relevant
for today’s students. Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014) asked college students to take
notes by hand or on a laptop while listening to some relatively unknown lectures from
the popular online series TED Talks. Afterward, the students engaged in about a half-
hour of other, unrelated tasks. To see what they had retained from the lectures, they
answered factual questions, such as names and dates, and conceptual questions about
broader issues in the lectures. The students who had taken notes by hand provided bet-
ter answers to the conceptual questions than those who had taken the notes on a laptop.
Looking at their notes, the researchers found that students using laptops tended to write
down the lectures nearly verbatim. Perhaps handwriting means forcing oneself to focus
on the meaning rather than transcription? This effect for better results from handwrit-
ten notes continued even when the laptop users were told to avoid writing down their
notes verbatim. In a third study, the researchers found the performance of the handwrit-
ing group well above that of the laptop group again when both groups were given the
opportunity to study their notes.
Generally speaking, research studies can be evaluated from two perspectives: (a) for
their methodology, or internal validity, and (b) for their generalizability to other situa-
tions, or external validity. For internal validity, concerns involve the design and execu-
tion of the study itself. For example, were there enough subjects in the study to draw
any conclusions? Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014) used several hundred students. How
many participants is enough is widely debated, but usually 20 per level of the independent
variable is considered a necessary minimum (Simmons, Nelson, & Simonsohn, 2011).
Mueller and Oppenheimer’s methods are reported clearly and could readily be replicated
by someone else. In terms of external validity, Mueller and Oppenheimer appeared to
have selected an excellent population to use for comparison to environments with adult
learners by using college students. It is a great concern for the field that the majority of
 CHAPTER 2 Common Research Methods in Learning and Memory 35

studies are conducted using college undergraduates, who are not terribly representative
of the global population as a whole (Henrich, Heine, & Norenzayan, 2010); but to use
college students for a study on how to study in college seems reasonable. Can we extra­
polate the findings to children, however? That would probably be unwise, until such a
study has been completed.
All of these issues over the quality of using surveys to study human learning and
memory are questions about their validity, a concept that can be applied to any research
study. For a study to be valid, it should accomplish what the researchers claim it does.
Surveys for memory research may be particularly prone to problems about validity
unless they are designed very carefully. If someone were to claim, for example, that older
people become more forgetful with age because they reported being more forgetful on a
survey, a reader could correctly question the validity of that conclusion. It’s quite likely
that older people believe they are more forgetful, but are they really?
One issue that tends to affect experimentation more so than other approaches is the
extent to which the experiment mirrors real-life situations and behaviors, called ecologi-
cal validity. Does the study seem to capture real-life behavior and situations well, or
does it seem completely artificial? The expectation is that a study should provide some
amount of mundane realism, or aspects of normal life, in order to provide findings that
are directly applicable to people and their lives. It’s possible for well-controlled studies
in contrived settings to produce behaviors from people that they may not normally do.
Of course, the power to explain the causes of some phenomena with experimentation
can come at a kind of cost: In order to conduct a well-designed, convincing experiment, it
may be necessary to create a highly controlled environment in which to conduct it. This
could include a sound-proofed room perhaps, or the use of eye-tracking equipment, or a
task that is simply unusual or very odd. A well-designed experiment can be so removed
from the experience of daily life that its findings, while stable and large (or “robust”),
may also be removed from the experience of daily life. This level of rigor may be needed
when conducting highly exploratory, basic kinds of research; but before drawing conclu-
sions about the normal “real-world” experiences of humans, it may be best to conduct
studies that at least attempt to mirror normal daily life, in setting and in task.

CHAPTER SUMMARY
Virtually all studies feature some task that the partici­ can be built relatively quickly and are an inexpensive
pants do or are observed doing. In this field, it will typi- way to collect data, but it’s not clear that people are
cally involve some form of learning and retrieval later on. always fully aware of how well they learn and remem-
Common tasks include studying lists of words, paired- ber. Also, people can be particularly motivated to sway
associate tasks, dual tasks, or implicit learning tasks that their presentation of themselves based on what they
the participants aren’t aware of. Typical ways to mea- think they should say. Memory diaries are intensive,
sure participants’ performance include accuracy (usually longitudinal records of personal events that research-
percent correct and incorrect), efficiency in processing ers can quiz themselves over later on. While powerful,
(reaction time), judgments about their own accuracy, and they do take a long time; and they usually involve the
brain imaging. memories of only one person, who can fall prey to bias in
Common research designs involve surveys and selecting what to record. Experiments can make causal
interviews, memory diaries, and experiments. Surveys connections between variables, because they include an
Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
 “We, therefore, denounce the action of the committee as a
dangerous attack upon Christian liberty and Congregational polity;
and we declare it to be, and to have been from the beginning, null
and void.”

Mr. Beecher, instead of fomenting this difficulty—which might

easily have been made the means of turning the tables upon his
clerical critics, and forcing them from the attack to the defensive—or
even sitting still, to await any advantages that might accrue to him
or his church, came at once to Dr. Budington’s relief. On January
12th he wrote to a prominent member of the latter’s church, urging
in the strongest terms that both the doctor, and the protestants,
should seek for some intermediate ground on which they could meet
in peace, and that the best men of the church should join to avert
the catastrophe which seemed impending. He also wrote an earnest
letter to Dr. Storrs, that he should join with him in seeking the peace
and unity of Dr. Budington’s church.
 Mr. Beecher and his Sister, Mrs. H. E. B.
Stowe.

At the same time he wrote a long letter directly to Dr. Budington,

in which, among other things, he said:

“ ... I pray you not to think that I am intruding on your affairs, or

that I am indelicate in offering to do anything I can. ... Now let me
assure you, my dear friend, that my first and last desire, as God sees
my heart, is to see your church harmonious, and to see you more
honored and firmly seated in the affection of your people than ever.
I suppose I do not exaggerate in saying that there is a large number
of your people who are aggrieved, and that they, like yourself, stand
upon a sincere conscience. Ought there not to be a way among
those who have the humility of Christ to conciliate and to reconcile
difficulties? And, my dear brother, ought not you, as teacher and
leader of this flock, to be a leader in self-abnegation, in tender
regard for those who differ with you, in overcoming evil with good,
in subduing opposition by love?
“Pardon me, I pray you. I long to see your power augmented and
your name, now honorable, still more honored.... I count the
integrity of your church and your continued usefulness in it as a
blessing, which cannot be lost without great blame somewhere, and
if I can help you I will do it with all the earnestness of my nature! I
long for restored peace in our churches.
“The peace which love brings is full of the fruits of the Spirit. I
think much of you; I pray for you in the watches of the night! If I
could help you effectually I should count it worth all that I have
suffered! I pray you do not put me from you, but let my heart be
strengthened and comforted by the reciprocal love of yours.
“I am, dear brother,
“Truly yours,
“Henry Ward Beecher.”

He also advised such of his friends in Dr. Budington’s church as he

met, to the same effect. Ultimately the storm blew over, though a
feeling of soreness remained in the Clinton Avenue Church for a long
time.
On March 24, 1874, the Advisory Council convened in Dr.
Budington’s church. Plymouth Church had been invited to be present
at the council by pastor and committee, “to correct any statement of
fact that may seem to them erroneous, and to furnish any further
and special information the council may request.”
To this Plymouth Church replied “that the calling of this ex-parte
council to consider the affairs of a church which has not declined a
mutual council is the consummation of a course of proceedings
against which, as irregular and unwarrantable, we have felt bound to
protest from the beginning. That we recognize in the statement, the
letter-missive, and the invitation as in former communications
addressed to us, a persistent attempt to put this church under
accusation and on trial, and that we cannot accept the invitation of
these two churches to appear before a council in the calling of which
we have been permitted to take no part, in which we have not been
offered the right of equal members, and in which we are not even
allowed to be ordinary defendants, but only to be witnesses to
correct errors and answer questions propounded to us.”
On the 28th the council made its “deliverance,” but so like a
Delphic oracle that neither its friends nor its foes seemed able to
agree upon its exact meaning.
As nearly as we can make out from the “deliverance” itself, and
the comments made upon it by members of the council, it was to
the effect: 1. That Plymouth Church was not en regle in its disposal
of Mr. Tilton’s case; 2. That the two sister-churches were unwise and
hasty; and 3. That Plymouth Church should not be read out of
fellowship.
Very shortly after the adjournment of the council a series of letters
were written by Dr. Bacon, of New Haven, and published in the
Independent, which reflected very strongly upon Mr. Tilton, who, in
the latter part of June, published a statement in which he made an
open charge; in this he declared that Mr. Beecher had committed an
offence against him which he forbore to name. This was the first
public charge made by Mr. Tilton. Up to this time the stories afloat
were vague and indefinite, impossible of tracing to their source.
Mr. Beecher was absent from the city when Tilton’s statement was
published, but, returning the next day, at once sent the following to
the gentlemen named therein:

“Brooklyn, June 27, 1874.

”Gentlemen: In the present state of public feeling I owe it. to my
friends, and to the church and the society over which I am pastor, to
have some proper investigation made of the rumors, insinuations, or
charges made respecting my conduct, as compromised by the late
publications made by Mr. Tilton. I have thought that both the church
and the society should be represented, and I take the liberty of
asking the following gentlemen to serve in this inquiry, and to do
that which truth and justice may require. I beg that each of the
gentlemen named will consider this as if it had been separately and
personally sent to him, namely:
“From the Church—Henry W. Sage, Augustus Storrs, Henry M.
Cleveland.
“From the Society—Horace B. Claflin, John Winslow, S. V. White.
“I desire you, when you have satisfied yourselves by an impartial
and thorough examination of all sources of evidence, to
communicate to the Examining Committee, or to the church, such
action as then may seem to you right and wise.
”Henry Ward Beecher.“

These names were selected after conference with the Examining

Committee of the church, most of them being suggested by that
committee. Two of the gentlemen named were members of the
Examining Committee, which immediately ratified the selection, and
by formal vote made them a sub-committee of its own.
After the committee had been organized and begun its
examination Mr. Beecher wrote and sent the following letter:

”Gentlemen of the Committee: In the note requesting your

appointment I asked that you should make full investigation of all
sources of information. You are witnesses that I have in no way
influenced or interfered with your proceedings or duties. I have
wished the investigation to be so searching that nothing could
unsettle its results. I have nothing to gain by any policy of
suppression or compromise.
“For four years I have borne and suffered enough, and I will not
go a step further. I will be free. I will not walk under a rod or yoke.
If any man would do me a favor, let him tell all he knows now. It is
not mine to lay down the law of honor in regard to the use of other
persons’ confidential communications; but, in so far as my own
writings are concerned, there is not a letter nor document which I
am afraid to have exhibited, and I authorize any and call upon any
living person to produce and print forthwith, whatever writings they
have from any source whatsoever.
 “It is time, for the sake of decency and of public morals, that this
matter should be brought to an end. It is an open pool of corruption,
exhaling deadly vapors.
“For six weeks the nation has risen up and sat down upon scandal.
Not a great war nor a revolution could more have filled the
newspapers than this question of domestic trouble; magnified a
thousandfold, and, like a sore spot in the human body, drawing to
itself every morbid humor in the blood. Whoever is buried with it, it
is time that this abomination be buried below all touch or power of
resurrection.”
The committee commenced their sittings on the 28th of June and
did not complete their report until the 28th day of August. The
committee requested the attendance of thirty-six witnesses, and
endeavored to obtain such facts as were relevant to the inquiry from
all attainable sources of evidence. In their report they stated that
“most of the persons named have attended as requested before the
committee. One notable exception is Francis B. Carpenter. Francis D.
Moulton promised to testify fully, but has failed to do so. He has
submitted three short statements in writing to the committee,
consisting chiefly of reasons why he declined to testify, and of
promises to testify at the call of the committee. The committee have
called him three times, with the results stated. In addition to the
evidence of the persons named, we have examined a considerable
number of letters and other documentary evidence which, in some
way, were supposed to relate to the subject-matter of inquiry. We
have held in the prosecution of our investigations twenty-eight
sessions.”
Mr. Tilton appeared and presented a partial statement, finally
refusing any further examination. Mrs. Tilton was examined, and
most emphatically and solemnly denied the charge which her
husband had made. Mr. Beecher was also examined; the substance
of his statement we have already presented. While the committee
was in session, and on the 21st of July, Mr. Tilton published a
statement in the Brooklyn Argus, in which for the first time he made
the specific charge of adultery. Up to this time, in his private
statements, he had charged “improper proposals”; this statement he
had made repeatedly, in confidence, to many different persons, and
had incorporated in his so-called “true statement,” which he had
shown to several; in this, in the most positive manner, he had denied
that his wife had been guilty. The reason for this change of position
will be made apparent later.
The committee in their report, after exhaustively reviewing the
evidence, concluded:

We find from the evidence that Mr. Beecher has never committed
any unchaste or improper act with Mrs. Tilton, nor made any
unchaste or improper remark, proffer, or solicitation to her of any
kind or description whatever.
“If this were a question of errors of judgment on the part of Mr.
Beecher, it would be easy to criticise, especially in the light of recent
events. In such criticism, even to the extent of regrets and censure,
we are sure no man would join more sincerely than Mr. Beecher
himself.
“We find nothing whatever in the evidence that should impair the
perfect confidence of Plymouth Church or the world in the Christian
character and integrity of Henry Ward Beecher.
“And now let the peace of God, that passeth all understanding,
rest and abide with Plymouth Church and her beloved and eminent
pastor, so much and so long afflicted.
“Henry W. Sage,
“Augustus Storrs,
“Henry M. Cleveland, Committee of
“Horace B. Claflin, Investigation.
“John Winslow,
“S. V. White,
“Dated Brooklyn, Aug. 27, 1874.”

This report, with its conclusions, was presented to the church on

Friday evening, the 28th, and accepted with great enthusiasm by a
unanimous vote, the immense throng, nearly three thousand in
number, rising en masse when the vote was put.
 The terrible struggle in silence had passed, and to Mr. Beecher the
relief at feeling that he could speak out in his own defence was
unutterable. He spoke of it often and strongly:
“And what was most singular was that when the church came into
the eclipse I came out of it. I had had my time when I was dumb
and opened not my mouth, and was led as a sheep to the slaughter;
but when the trouble came upon the whole church, with its intense
suffering, there came to me emancipation. God was pleased to
uphold me as I walked alone and in silence, and afterwards He gave
me such relief that during the two or three years in which the church
was shrouded in great anxiety I was filled with trust and courage,
and was enabled all the time to lift up the church and carry it
hopefully along from Sabbath to Sabbath.”
“ ... I have rolled off my burden; I am in the hands of God; I am
certain of salvation and safety in God, and I do not give it any lower
application; but I am hidden in His pavilion, I am surrounded by His
peace, and I have got back, through storms and troubles, to the
simplicity and the quiet enjoyment which belonged to me many
years ago. My thought, my feeling, and my soul run very quiet; and
it is the result, not so much of any visible and external thing, as that
I am sure I am surrounded by the hand of my God. I live in Him,
and He lives in me, and He gives me the promised peace.”
The publication of Mr. Beecher’s statement (a short time prior to
the committee’s report) was as great a relief to Mr. Beecher’s friends,
as the opportunity to make it had been to him. Many who trusted
him implicitly, believing that there was some reason for his silence,
could not but wonder what it might be; and when they learned that
he had suffered reproach in silence, rather than open the doors to
the vile flood which would deluge the land, bringing sorrow to
hundreds of homes, unwilling to violate the pledge he had given to
Tilton and Bowen until the former’s treachery at last compelled him,
their loving confidence and sympathy were only intensified.
The clouds of mystery had been cleared away, and all was plain as
noonday. We have room to quote but one of the many letters
received, as an apt expression of the feelings produced by the
statement. We give entire the letter of President Porter, of Yale
College:

“Lake Placid, New York.

”My dear Mr. Beecher: I have been on the point of writing to you
for the last few weeks, from time to time, to express my unabated
confidence and my increasing sympathy for you in your great trial;
but I have refrained, knowing that you were too much occupied to
listen to anything except necessary advice. But I have just read your
statement, and am more than satisfied with it. It would be a slight
thing to say that I believe it to be true. I do not read for myself, but
for the world at large. I believe it will be accepted as true by all,
except sons of Belial, and those who have been committed against
you in decided partisanship. More than this: I think that it will secure
you the warm sympathy of multitudes whom you have not reached,
or only slightly, before this, and that you will be held in higher honor
than ever for integrity of purpose and generosity of self-sacrifice,
and that your example, while it will teach discretion from your
weakness, will enforce, in a manifestly more impressive way, the
dignity and strength of a willingness to suffer in silence, that others
might be spared. I believe the Lord will make your latter days better
than in the beginning (as is said of Job), and if you are willing to
stop doing twice as much as any mortal should attempt, your pulpit
and pastoral influence will be more blessed than ever.
“Most affectionately, your friend,
“Noah Porter.”

Early in the sessions of the committee Mr. Tilton withdrew—as we

understand, not liking to be followed up on cross-examination—
threatening to institute legal proceedings against Mr. Beecher, and,
as preliminary thereto, published his statement of July 21.
We have alluded to the fact that at this stage Tilton wholly
changed the nature of his charge. In all the stories which he and
Moulton had told to various friends at different times, and in the
statements which he had prepared and shown in confidence, the
charge was always “improper proposals” and an emphatic assertion
of his wife’s innocence. Now he proposed to stake all on one cast of
the dice. He would bring a suit, and, if he could get no more help,
he would at least, so his vanity and Mr. Beecher’s evil-wishers
assured him, crush Mr. Beecher. Indeed, he and Moulton were
cornered, and must resort to some desperate measures or surrender
themselves to everlasting infamy. Had they been left to themselves,
it is perhaps doubtful if they would have attempted so desperate a
remedy, even in self-defence; but there were those, not a few, who
egged them on, contributing to the expense of the suit, glad to keep
up the attack on Mr. Beecher, provided only their names were not
brought out.
But an action at law would not lie for merely “improper
proposals”; it must go further than that. The case must be
reconstructed. In no published statement, up to this time, had Tilton
made any definite charge. Now he would put his charge in such
shape as would serve the purposes of a suit; hence the statement of
July 21, followed by a similar statement from Moulton published in
the Graphic on August 21. The same day Tilton began his action
against Mr. Beecher, placing his damages at $100,000.
On the 3d of October both Tilton and Moulton were indicted for
criminal libel by the Grand Jury of Kings County, on Mr. Beecher’s
complaint. (After the failure of the jury to agree in the civil suit, this
was nolle-prossed.)
Tilton’s suit came on for trial the 6th of January, 1875, before
Judge Joseph Neilson, of the Brooklyn City Court. It is not necessary
to go into the details of this trial. The same evidence, substantially,
was presented as was received by the investigating committee, and
as appeared in the published statements. For six months the case
occupied the time of the court and jury, the testimony covering
several thousand pages of printed matter.
The case was submitted to the jury the 24th day of June. For nine
days the jury strove to reach an agreement, finally being discharged
the 2d day of July, standing three for plaintiff and nine for
defendant.
We are informed, on the authority of one of the jurors, that
several times they stood eleven to one in defendant’s favor, and
once all agreed on a verdict for defendant, when a juror
unfortunately remarked that his son had wagered a large sum on a
verdict for the defendant; this statement split the jury at once, and
from thence on they remained three to nine, until they were
discharged. The case was never brought to trial again, the plaintiff
wholly abandoning it. It is well known that after plaintiff had
abandoned his case, his leading counsel, Hon. William A. Beach,
frequently and publicly declared that the trial of the cause had
convinced him of Mr. Beecher’s innocence, and that he felt as though
they had been a pack of hounds trying to pull down a noble lion.
Five years later he expressed similar views to the writer.
In the course of the trial Mrs. Moulton took the stand against Mr.
Beecher. With downcast eye, and hesitating voice, she corroborated
her husband.
Before the trial she withdrew from the public service of Plymouth
Church, and became a constant attendant at the Church of the
Pilgrims (Dr. Storrs).
Plymouth Church could no longer tolerate her within its
membership. It was fully believed that, under the coercion of her
husband, she had committed perjury during the trial, and had
grossly slandered her pastor. This would have been the ground of
charges against her, but the church was advised that to try her on
any charge based upon her testimony in court, while the suit was
still pending (plaintiff’s attorneys had renoticed the cause for a new
trial, shortly after the disagreement), might involve them in a
contempt of court, and, in any event, would be construed as an
attempt to intimidate one of plaintiff’s most important witnesses.
But, since she had persistently absented herself from the services of
the church, she could be dropped under the seventh rule of the
church manual. She was accordingly notified of the proposed action
of the church and invited to be present on the 4th of November.
After hearing her defence through her legal counsel, her name was
dropped from the rolls by a vote of the church.
She at once demanded a mutual council, to be called by Plymouth
Church and herself. Plymouth Church protested against Drs. Storrs’s
and Budington’s churches participating therein, both of whom she
had named, on the ground that they were obviously committed to
her side and could not be impartial, but at the same time stated that
they would go on with the council. Mrs. Moulton declined unless the
protest were withdrawn. This being refused, she withdrew.
About this time it was being rumored in certain circles, and
notably in Boston, that Mr. Beecher and his church had some great
secret that they were concealing from the world, and for this reason
had declined the mutual council which Mrs. Moulton had proposed—
forgetting that Mrs. Moulton was the one who had abandoned the
council, and further forgetting that an opportunity had been offered
to any who knew anything detrimental to Mr. Beecher, to testify
against him, first before the committee, that sat for two months, and
then in the trial, that lasted over six months. Friends of Mr. Beecher
wrote to him from Boston of this feeling. He sent word at once to a
friend to get the doubters together, and that his brother, Dr. Edward
Beecher, would meet them and answer all questions. From this
friend we received the following account of the meeting:
“Immediately I set about the work of collecting those who, I
thought, were honorable men, but misinformed into believing many
things in the case which I knew to be false.... I did not invite a man
who had given signs of being a friend of your father, but I asked
every man of weight in the community whom I had reason to
believe was prejudiced against him, and every man, to whom I had
access, who had expressed to my knowledge a judgment hostile to
him.
“The majority accepted.... My parlors were filled.... At the
appointed hour a hack arrived from the depot, and out stepped your
father, followed by his brother. He entered the parlors, and said in
substance:
“‘Gentlemen, I have been told that some of you feel that there is a
lack of frankness on my part with reference to the painful matter in
controversy, and that there is a desire, either on my part or on the
part of my friends, to cover up and conceal facts. If you think so you
are in error. Our first desire is to make everything known. But it is,
we find, impossible to do so, because so many false rumors are
flying about, and everything we say gets into the papers twisted
awry. I have come here to beg you to ask any questions you desire.
Do not spare my feelings. Do not be restrained by any consideration
of delicacy. The more searching, the more crucial your questions are,
the kinder you will be. I will answer any question you can ask
pertaining to this affair.’
“Hour after hour questions were asked. They were put one at a
time, slowly. Some seemed but slightly relevant. Some made my
blood boil to hear. Some seemed such as a judge might ask of a
convicted criminal before pronouncing sentence. But every question
was answered categorically, when that was possible, but always fully
and exhaustively, so that the questioner pronounced himself entirely
answered by the reply.
“During the entire session there did not fall from your father’s lips
one impatient word, one harsh rejoinder. Not by a gesture did he
give evidence that he suffered. Only the quick flush that came at
times upon his cheek, showed the keenness of the torture caused
him by this inquisition.
“Before he left I asked each one present, privately, if there was
any question he could think of, an answer to which would, in his
opinion, throw light upon the matter, which had not been asked. In
every case I received a negative reply.”
 CHAPTER XXVI.

After-Effects of the Conspiracy—Calling Council of 1876—Principle of Selection—

Mr. Beecher Cautions his Church—Bowen Reappears; Proposes a Secret
Tribunal—Mr. Beecher’s Reply—Bowen Dropped by Plymouth Church—
Deliverance of Council sustaining Plymouth—Mr. Beecher’s Persecutors
Denounced—Special Tribunal.

But now the organized determination to break down Mr. Beecher’s

ministry and overthrow his church manifested itself by a new line of
tactics.
There were at this time a few members whose relation to the
church was very peculiar, who were neither in it nor out of it,
apparently, who did not ask, or who refused positively, to take letters
to other churches, who were not amenable to the discipline of the
church, but who stood off, would not attend its meetings nor
observe its ordinances, and who, when dealt with fraternally, in
every way the church knew how, to procure them peaceably to sever
their connection and relieve the church from responsibility, refused
to do it or neglected to do it; and then, when it was proposed to
drop them, without any reflection more than belonged to the nature
of the case, they threatened, “If you drop us we will call a council.”
There were at one time four councils threatened, by four different
members on these grounds. It soon became very clearly understood,
that the tactics of the adversary were now, to wear out the patience
of the people, by a continuous series of councils, which would at last
weary men from coming to a church where there was such incessant
trouble.
It was in consequence of these tactics, that Plymouth Church
determined to end all such annoyances, by calling a National
Advisory Council, that should look through its rules and principles,
and its entire administration under them; to have it of such
magnitude, and made up of such churches and men, as that its
deliverances would be final, making an end of all these controversies
and giving the church solid ground to go on.
Invitations were sent to one hundred and seventy-two churches,
to be represented by pastor and delegate, and twenty ministers
without charges, principally theological writers and professors in
theological colleges. None were invited from New York City or
Brooklyn, because of the general local feeling.
The principal questions submitted were, substantially, whether
Plymouth Church had acted contrary to the word of God or the
principles of Christian justice in allowing to itself in any case any
other mode of terminating membership than death, letters of
dismission, and excommunication?
2. What course ought it to pursue towards those who persistently
absented themselves from its services for various personal reasons?
3. And towards those who were reported as having made
insinuations affecting the character of other members, but who
neither admit nor deny such reports?
4. Whether the church should have called a mutual council to
investigate the charges against its pastor when so required by a
member who submits no charges, and more than a year after a full
investigation by the church, in which the pastor had been sustained
by a unanimous vote?
5. Whether its course in the case of Mrs. Moulton had been wise
and just?
6. Whether, in its maintenance of order, it had gone beyond its
rights, so as to justly forfeit its claim to the confidence and
fellowship of Congregational churches?
The letter-missive was dated February 1, 1876, and the council
was called for the 15th.
The principle upon which the council was made up, we can learn
from a letter written January 28, 1876, by Mr. Beecher to an eminent
doctor of divinity whose advice he wished respecting certain
churches in his vicinity:
 “Allow me to say a word as to the principles of selection in this
council. It will be gathered from the whole land, as far West as the
Mississippi. It leaves out men committed to a policy, or who are
known to be working in league with adversary churches. But I wish
to have honest men, capable of judging upon facts and evidence,
who are not so obstinate that they will not yield to conviction, or so
tied to theories that they will look at everything under a bias. I don’t
care whether they like me or not, whether they agree with my
views, whether they approve or disapprove of all the policy of
Plymouth Church. I only want men who will be candid and who will
act impartially.”
Quite a number attended who had been members of the prior
council of 1874; and when the council met, a considerable majority
—their views having been acquired from newspaper reports—
entertained grave doubts as to the regularity of Plymouth Church in
its previous conduct. The effect which the evidence presented had
upon their minds will appear later on.
At the Friday night prayer-meeting just preceding the sitting of
council, Mr. Beecher cautioned his people respecting their conduct
during the council.
“This church has for years been called to go through deep waters.
For more than twenty years we had well-nigh unabated prosperity,
and we were almost ready to boast that we had such wise methods
of government and such signal presentations of truth as made our
church life easy; that we had not the vexations which belonged to
other churches; and it is not unlikely that we may have become
proud and self-sufficient. But certainly for the last few years God has
been dealing with us as with sons, and has chastened us; and it
becomes us to bear in mind that the best gift of God to an individual
or to a church is that kind of chastisement which works out trust,
patience, long-suffering, kindness, and fruitfulness in labor.
“With these thoughts in mind, I wish to-night to speak a few
words to you, and exhort you, even more signally in days that are to
come, than you have in days that are past (for from my heart I can
commend you in this respect), to carry out and ennoble that
patience, that fidelity, and that churchly love, which, under great
difficulties you have shown.
“My beloved, beware lest your intelligent judgment and
conscientiousness in the cause of Christ, be absorbed in the feeling
of personal love and sympathy for your elder brother. Beware lest
you be drawn into a kind of clannish feeling of anxiety for him. I
know that I have your love and sympathy, and I know that I am
prayed for by you. That suffices me; but on your part it will be very
bad for you to suffer this mere human feeling toward an individual to
fill so large a place in your heart as that it may be said to fill your
experience. You are a church of Christ set on a hill, and you cannot
be hid; and your business here is to manifest Jesus Christ to the
world in such a way as to win them to a nobler life; and you ought
not to forget for what you are ordained. I have tried to set you an
example. I have endeavored to keep free from such states of mind,
and from such personality, either as regards you or myself, as should
interfere with the teaching and the reception here of the fullest and
most edifying truths of our common faith; and by the grace of God I
have been enabled mainly to succeed in doing it. I doubt if any one
hearing the sermons that have been preached here, with one or two
exceptions, for the last five years, would from them suspect anything
of that history through which this church has gone.
“So far as you are concerned, I do not say that it is possible for
you not to converse about our difficulties in your families, and with
each other; but you may do it too much; and, therefore, I wish to
emphasize that your business as a church is not to take care of me,
but to take care of and forward the work of the Lord Jesus Christ,
your Head and Master. Do not, therefore, under the influence of
amiable feelings, and warm sympathies, make the mistake of
supposing that you are in a campaign of any sort, except that of
rallying around about our appointed Leader. In the church, in your
families, and in our mission schools, your business is to promote the
teaching of Christ, for the awakening of men, and for the building up
of all those who have undertaken the Christian life.
“In pursuing this course, it behooves you to remember that under
such severe and prolonged trouble, God expects of you, not only
that you will be constant and faithful in His service, but that you will
grow richer, more spiritual, and in every way more like Christ. You
have had, and are having, a better opportunity for fulfilling the
disposition set forth in the Gospel, than is given to one church in a
hundred. God has been and is dealing with you as with sons.
“We are on the eve of a memorable week. In 1874 a great council
was called in Brooklyn to sit on our affairs, in which we were not to
participate; now we have called a council to act upon our own
affairs, and in this we must needs participate; and there are one or
two things that I wish to say to you.
“First, you that receive the brethren into your households, ought
to set up in your hearts a sentiment of honor that shall have no
downfall nor intermission. Those gentlemen that come to take part
in this council come impartially. Their office is to hear, and to give
such advice as the Lord may inspire in them, upon the facts that
shall be presented. In some sense—not technically—they are as
judges; and you must not attempt in your homes to influence them,
nor by your sympathy and kindness in the least degree to beguile
them from the fullest and fairest discharge of their duty. Even if their
judgment should be adverse to your convictions and mine,
nevertheless it is very plainly a matter of Christian honor that they
should be in your families, without in the least being biassed by
social influences.
“Secondly, when you shall attend the open meetings of the council
(for it must needs be that largely the audience will be composed of
members of this church and society), I beseech of you, by all that is
honorable and by all that is gentlemanly, that there be, neither from
the gallery nor from any other part of the house, first or last, the
slightest exhibition either of approval or disapproval. I could wish
that you might sit in your pews as if you were marble, though I
know that your hearts are hot within you. That council ought to be
able to sit in the midst of the congregation of this church and never
hear a whisper nor feel a wave of influence exerted upon them. We
called them that they might do their duty faithfully; and I trust that
you will commend yourselves in their sight by the most absolute
abstention from any expression of thought or feeling in their
presence.
“In the third place, I beg of you, both now and when they shall
have assembled, to bear them in your hearts in prayer, morning and
night, before God.
“If you will pray more for men you will have less occasion to do
anything else; and, in regard to this council, praying for them is a
mode of exerting an influence upon them, which you may indulge in.
Do you believe in God? Do you believe in the Holy Spirit? Do you
believe in prayer? Do you not believe that it is in the power of God
to descend into such a council, to bring a summer atmosphere into
them and around them, and to lead them by the invisible hand of
truth, of love, and of justice? Pray much for them.
“And in one last word let me say that while all this agitation is
going on, while the papers are full of bickerings, full of fiery darts
that fall like sparks from the smith’s forge, remember that your duty
is in church work and in church life. So far as possible, throw these
unpleasant things off from your mind; take care of your classes and
schools; attend faithfully to your mission work; live sweeter and
holier lives in the family; be better men and better Christians in the
household; do not let too much of the storm whistle through the
cracks and crevices of your experience—keep it out; live individually
and collectively near to Christ, and He will take care of me and of
you. As He has done in times past, so will He do, and more
abundantly, in the future, to the joy of our hearts and to the honor
of His own great name.”
In the interim between the calling of the council and its
convening, the case of Mr. Bowen came up before the church. For
several years past, the old stories, which were supposed to have
originated with him, had been set in circulation again, and quite
recently a card appeared in a Brooklyn paper, over the signature of
Mr. Bowen’s son, in effect repeating these slanders. A committee of
Plymouth Church waited upon Mr. Bowen, but he refused to admit or
deny that he was the originator of the stories—refused to make any
statement or do anything. Ultimately he sent a letter to the
committee (at the same time publishing it in the newspapers)
making charges against Mr. Beecher, but in effect refusing to
substantiate them, because he had not time to look up his evidence;
but offering to submit his charges to a confidential committee of
three, provided he should not be called on to give names, and that
the committee should report only their conclusions.
When this letter was read at a church meeting Mr. Beecher arose
and said:
“I do not propose to argue this question to-night—it is not fit that
I should do it. I only propose to say one or two words on the
matter; and one is: if for the last fifteen years and more, Mr. Bowen
has been in possession of such facts as he now alleges in his letter,
that he has, and never has mentioned them to me, nor
communicated them to any officer of this church, nor in anywise
brought them to the knowledge of the church itself, he deserves to
be expelled from the church for a violation of his covenant. If I am
what he alleges me to be, and have been what he alleges I have
been, and he knew it, and permitted it, without a word of warning to
me or to this church, he has committed a crime against the church,
and against morality; and if his allegation is not true, but is a lie,
then he is guilty of one of the blackest crimes that ever emanated
from the bottomless pit—and, before God, I pronounce the
allegations that he has, made to be utterly false.
“Further let me say that when Mr. Bowen, being called upon to
state what these facts are, and what are the proofs of them which
he has in his possession, pleads that he is upon trial, and that he
has not time to look them up, what are we to think of such a plea?
He had time to write that letter, and to charge me with being a
criminal before the public of this continent, and, having had time to
represent me as a monster, and to publish that representation in the
newspapers, now, when he is asked, ‘What is your evidence?’ he has
not time to produce it! Ought not that to have been thought of
before he made the charge public?
“I have another word to say, and that is in regard to the tribunal
which he proposes—a tripartite committee, a committee composed
of three persons—on condition that in their presence he may hide
names, and that then their judgment be given out in adjudication of
the question. Now, I say that no secrecy shall rest on this matter. I
do not say that I would not in some respects be willing to go before
such a committee, but this I say: Nothing on this subject shall be
kept secret. If this matter is not explored to the bottom it shall be
because my will is set aside. I do not propose that Mr. Bowen shall
hide himself, nor will I permit anything to be hidden about me, by
having the matter referred to any three gentlemen who shall only let
out what they think. What they think will not satisfy you; what they
think will not satisfy me; and since the allegations have been made
public through the newspapers, and Mr. Bowen’s name is attached to
them, he has got to face the facts, he has got to produce the
evidence. And as for myself, I have only this to say: I pronounce all
the insinuations and allegations he has made as false, and, with
Almighty God and the judgment day before me, I arraign him as a
slanderer and a liar.”
Mr. Bowen produced no evidence to sustain his charges, and the
church subsequently voted that they could dispense with him.

On the 15th of February the council, the largest of its kind that
had ever been convened in this country, met. Dr. Bacon was chosen
moderator; ex-Governor Dingley, of Maine, and General Erastus N.
Bates, assistant moderators.
While the questions presented to the council were principally as to
church regularity, the sixth also opened up the question of the action
and result of the Investigating Committee referred to, and, generally,
the whole conduct of the church with reference to its pastor; this
naturally led to questions being put to Mr. Beecher personally as to
the policy he had followed respecting the scandal.
Both Mr. Beecher and the committee of the church invited the
fullest questioning on any point that could be suggested; urged the
council to invite Drs. Storrs and Budington to be present, to call Mrs.
Moulton’s counsel, and to examine Mr. Bowen—all of which the
council did, Drs. Storrs and Budington declining to attend.
For eight days—three sessions each day, morning, afternoon, and
evening—Mr. Beecher and the committee stood as targets for the
questions of the council.
 We present some of Mr. Beecher’s replies, as throwing light upon
himself, and his actions, during the origin and growth of the scandal.
To the question why he had remained silent during the earlier
rumors set afloat by Bowen and Tilton, and did not demand an
investigation, he said: “This was the reason. The relations which
subsisted between me and my people were those of very strong
personal affection. I know all of you must be very much beloved by
those whom you attend in sickness, to whom you preach, and whose
troubles and sorrows you console. My God has given me a
sympathetic nature, ardent and loving. I attract friends to me, and
usually I hold them. I was dear to very many; and it has been the
honor, as it has been the glory, of my recollection, that I have been
beloved by those, to be beloved by whom is itself enough witness
and enough honor. And it was because, from various reasons,
intimations were made pointing to one, and another, and another,
that I saw that, if I were to rush recklessly out after every rumor of
this kind, which came insidiously and circuitously, I should bring a
torrent of publicity and reproach upon one, two, three, many
persons; and the question with me was, not simply what I ought to
do, but, ‘Will you, for your own vindication, bring on an
investigation, and project into publicity those persons who have the
rights, the sanctities, and the delicacies of the domestic circle around
about them?’ And now you see, when the first of these rumors has
been brought into public notice, how it has spread and gone, like a
fire on a prairie, all over the United States; and you see just what I
apprehended would be the case. Having connected with me, in my
relations to public affairs, parties and discussions of many sorts, I
knew that the connection with my name in one of these various
matters, under the circumstances, would proclaim it throughout
Christendom; and the question with me was: ‘Will you stand
patiently for God to vindicate you from these suggestions, putting to
shame those that accuse you falsely; or will you vindicate yourself by
bringing sheeted publicity, and lurid investigation, on one, on two, or
on scores?’ I chose the course of silence.”
In reply to another question:
 “Now, I wish to hear the other part of the question, sir—whether I
am willing that Dr. Storrs and Dr. Budington should state anything
that they know—any facts? I should like to know how much longer a
man need be at the focus of a solar microscope, with all the sun in
the heavens concentrated upon him for six months, and everything
that could be raked, from the North Pole to the South Pole, and
round the earth forty times circuited, raked up and brought in, and
be willing to have it raked up and brought in again? How much
longer does a man want to have his willingness to have the truth
come out, vindicated? If there is any man on earth that has anything
to say—that he wants to say—if there is any man on earth that has
anything to say to my detriment, I here and now challenge him to
say it! I go further than that. If there be any angel of God, semi-
prescient and omniscient, I challenge him to say aught. I go beyond
that, and, in the name of our common Redeemer, and before Him
who shall judge you and me, I challenge the truth from God Himself!
And what is all this going to do? To-morrow morning it will be said in
the local journals: ‘Well, Mr. Beecher—how rhetorically he managed
the matter!’ And it will be put in the religious papers: ‘Oh! yes; that
was a very plausible statement at the time, but—but—’ And I am in
judgment between two devils, ‘But’ and ‘If.’ Nothing that I say is
taken to be true, and I am put upon a perpetual trial of my veracity;
although I am willing to be tried, I don’t disguise from myself,
suppressing every sentiment of natural honor that pertains to a
gentleman—I know perfectly well this whole process is a continuous
trial and crucifixion of every sentiment of honor and every sensibility
of my soul, and that I am questioned, and questioned, and
questioned, and questioned, as I have been, through months and
years, on the supposition that the truth has not been got out. And I
suppose it will be so to the end of my life. I don’t look with any
great hope for the result of this council. I don’t look for any hope
from the result of any council or tribunal. I think there is hope in the
grave, and beyond; but for me, I expect to walk with a clouded
head, not understood, until I go to heaven, and that is not far off—
that is not far away. And I am content to bear just that lot that my
dear Lord puts on me. He knows what is best. I have accepted it.
Though the natural man rebels once in a while and bubbles out, yet
grace in the end puts it down. But I am content to walk so. All my
sorrow is that the preciousness of the Gospel, which it is given to me
to preach, is hindered somewhat by this trouble; but to work for
Christ, and to save men, is my calling, and not to vindicate myself.”
Again, referring to the perverse malignity that had characterized
his enemies: “I said, and now I repeat it, that this church and its
pastor have been systematically, studiously pursued with perversions
and what cannot be considered other than deliberate falsehoods. In
some quarters, whatever has happened has been so uniformly
twisted, as to indicate what I supposed to be the truth—namely, an
organized movement to pervert everything and destroy that
influence which I formerly had with the common people of America,
and then to bring vexations, so many and so frequent, upon the
church as to disintegrate its patience, and thus to leave me alone
without anything. And I will say that the backbitings, the
whisperings, the innuendoes, the studious shutting of the
understanding to all fairness, when I make statements, and the
opening it wide to all partisan misrepresentations, when those
statements were reported otherwise, have been such as to open a
new chapter in my mind of human experience, and to carry me far
back towards the old doctrine of total depravity.”
In the course of one of the sessions the pastor of a Boston
church, referring to the unjust rumor, current in certain quarters,
that since the scandal had come out the church and its pastor had
not brought out all the facts, that there were rumors of something
yet unpublished, and that they were now unreasonably refusing to
submit the matter before some new tribunal, expressed his surprise
at hearing the statement of the committee, and wondered that Mr.
Beecher and his church had not been better understood by the
public. To this Mr. Beecher replied:
“Gentlemen, you won’t suspect me of any disrespect to you, but I
want to put a home question to you. This church has been occupied
in publishing to the world for the last three years, a statement of
those facts that have set you perfectly aghast, as novel and
wonderful. What are you going to do when the representatives of
the morality and the intelligence of this nation won’t read a word
that is published, of the results of the church investigation, and the
court investigation, but, coming up after they have been published
for months, yet are amazed at the simple statement of that, which
has been in the newspapers and the court records, during all this
time? Are we forced not only to forge wedges of intelligence, but use
clubs to drive them into your heads? We have been doing everything
that man could do, in opening, in publishing, and, as far as it took
any definite shape, in meeting. But you cannot hunt a stench; you
can an arrow, but a smell you can’t. And therefore these odorous
beasts are going up and down the streets, casting some venom and
some odor; we can’t spend the time of a Christian church for ever
hunting these things. Am I to run after every rat in creation? Am I to
run after every leech, and worm, and every venomous insect?
“You have a right to demand of us that we shall meet accusations
when they come up responsibly stated. Did we not meet them the
moment the ‘Bacon letter’ appeared? Within the time that was
necessary to bring me back from the country and back to the city,
did we not instantly meet them with a call for investigation in the
church? Was not that investigation made with a proclamation to the
world to bring in everything known? It was not zeal covering me, it
was dissection, and when the investigation had been made it was
published to the world. No sooner had it been completed than we all
distributed ourselves in the country for rest. When we came back I
went instantly to a civil court. That trial was noticed for action
immediately on my return, and I continued for six months in that
court-room, and every paper in the United States helped distribute
the information of the facts that were then disclosed. In July or
August the court adjourned and we went back into the country. We
had scarcely come back again from the summer vacation, before we
took the matter up again in regard to members of this church, and
issued process upon them, and this process has been that which has
filled, the whole time since, the newspapers and the clerical mind of
the country. Where has been the time and space in which we could
institute anything else? Have we not been busy? Or shall we stay up
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

ebookbell.com