918
493
671
683
321
572
532
228
787
746
264
435
823
974
358The score for one correct word was 1.
A word apparently misheard but remembered as heard (e.g., slake for slate or amaze for maze) was scored correct. Each individual's testimony was accepted in such cases. For each word written that was not in the list a discount of one word was made. Such errors are rare, making only 3 per cent, of the words written; 50 seconds were allowed to write out the words remembered for each list.
Each three-place number recalled exactly counted i. Each number of which two digits were correct and correctly placed counted .5. 30 seconds were allowed to write out the numbers for each remembered list.
The obtained 'raw' correlation for (1) is .4^ .1. The mixture of the two sexes and the testing of the two traits in the same hour tend to make this higher than the relation between the general ability to remember word lists and the general ability to remember three-place number lists. On the other hand, there is the attenuation due to the variation, in both (a) and (b), of the result from five tests from the person's true ability. I estimate that correction for all three would result in a correlation of about -5/' The relation between (a) and memory of lists of 12 single digits was found to be .6, eight independent records of each being used. Correction for attenuation raises this to .7 . So, until more adequate measures are made, we may accept as the most likely fact that, in such a test of brief retention, a variation in the content from words to numbers reduces the correlation from i to about #5. Even if the reduction should prove to be to only %, the fact would still be very strong evidence of the dependence of efficiency of memory upon content and of the specialization of mental functions in general.
The obtained 'raw* correlation for (2) is .5^ .1 Allowing for the mixture of the sexes, the inaccuracies of the original measures, and the individual variations in the experiences upon which the memories for twenty-four hours were based, I estimate the relation as .8 .1. I know of no other measure of the relation between brief and long retention in the case of unconnected material. Henderson, in the case of connected trains of thought, gives data for memory over a few minutes from three minutes' study and memory of the same material after forty-eight hours, based upon the three minutes' study and the experience of writing out what was remembered at its close. The resulting correlations would seem, if corrected for attenuation on the one hand, and for mixture of the sexes and of differently selected groups on the other, to be about .9.
The relation between retention of the effects of an experience for one or two minutes and their retention for one or two days thus seems to be one of the closest yet measured in human nature.
