j4,.- K$- , - ,

Technical el* 436. /)/\j rT-/ r,

A OEVIEW OF THE JITI 0 MEMORY

ENHANCEMENT: THE POTENTIAL AND

.ELEVANCE OF MNEMOTECHNICS FOR MILITARY

TRAINING ..

0

Dou glas/Grif fith

ARI FIELD UNIT AT FORT HOOD, TEXAS

DTIC SELECTERW

JUL 1 0 1980j

U. S. Army

__ Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

j DecIIIII11179

Approved for public release, distribution unlimited.

80 7 10 0 2 1,
44

U. S. ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

A Field Operating Agency under the Jurisdiction of the

Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

FRANKLIN A. HART

JOSLPII ZE311NER Colonel, US Army

Technical IDirector Cornmander

NOTICES

DISTRIBUTION Prirriaiy distribution of this report has been made by ARI. Please address correspondecfl.f

concerning distr.Iutiori of reports to U S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.

ATTN: PERI-_TP, 5001 Eisenhowerr Avenue, Alexandria, Virginia 22333.

FINAL Of SPOSITIONy This report may he destroyed when it is no longer needed. Please do not return it to

the U. S. A rmy Research Iinstitute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.

NOrE The findings in this iefiort are not to be construed as an official Department of the Army position

unless so designated hv other ruthorized documnents.
Unclassified SECiRITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (When Data Entered)

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE BEFORE COMPLETI FORM

I. REPORT NUMBER 2.GOVT ACCESSIN NO. 3. RCIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER

Technical Report 436

4. TITLE (amd Subtfitle) 5. TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVERED

A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ON MEMORY ENHANCEMENT: Interim

THE POTENTIAL AND RELEVANCE OF MNEMOTECHNICS FOR

MILITARY TRAINING 6. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER

7. AUTHOR(a) 8. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(.)

Douglas Griffith

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT, PROJECT, TASK AREA & WORK UNIT NUMBERS

U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral

and Social Sciences (Peri-OH) 2Q762722A765

5001 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22333

II. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE

December 1979

Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel D3. U R PA 13. NUMBER OF PAGES -

Washington, D.C. 20310 61

14. MONITORING AGENCY NAME & ADDRESS(if different from Controlling Office) 15. SECURITY CLASS. (of thie report)

Unclassified

IS.. DECL ASSI FICATION/DOWNGRADING

SCHEDULE

16. DISTRIBUTION STATEME,6T (of this Report)

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

17. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the abstract entered In Block 20, If diflerent from Report)

IS. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

19. KEY WORDS (Continue on reveree aide it neceeery nd identify by block number)

Mnemonics Training

Mnemotechnics Learning

Human memory

20. ABSTRACT (Cesiftue - eve s if nmeee a, and iderdify by block number)

-- > This report reviews the literature on memory enhancement.and assesses the

potential of techniques designed to enhance memory (mnemotechnics) for military

training. An overview describes a wide range of mnemotechnics. After a review

of the empirical literature on mnemotechnics, a research strategy is offered

for applying mnemonics and mnemotechnics to military training. Mnemonics and

mnemotechnics have the potential to significantly enhance training effective- ness. However, if they are not carefully researched and implemented, it is

likely that their training potential will be mitigated if not entirely lost,

DO ,' 14n3 DoTrION Or P NOV 45 IS OBSOLETE (Continued)

i Unclassified

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF TNIS PAGE (Whan Dota Entered)
Unclassified

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE(lhan Data Et.emd)

Item 20 (Continued)

This report is intended primarily for professional researchers to

identify areas of needed research. It can also be used by the military

training community to assess the training potential of mnemonics and

mnemotechnics.

Unclassified

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE(When Dara Fnter*J)
Technical Report 436

A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ON MEMORY

ENHANCEMENT: THE POTENTIAL AND

RELEVANCE OF MNEMOTECHNICS FOR MILITARY

TRAINING

Douglas Griffith

Submitted by:

George W. Gividen, Chief

ARI FIELD UNIT AT FORT HOOD, TEXAS

Approved by:

Edgar M. Johnson, Acting Director

ORGANIZATIONS AND SYSTEMS

RESEARCH LABORATORY

U.S. ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

5001 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, Virginia 22333

Office, Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

Department of the Army

December 1979

Army Project Number Memory Enhancement

20762722A765

ii i

Approyed for public releate. distribution unlimited.
ARI Research Reports and Technical Reports are intended for sponsors of

R&D tasks and for other research and military agencies. Any findings ready

for implementation at the time of publication are presented in the last part

of the Brief. Upon completion of a major phase of the task, formal recommendations for official action normally are conveyed to appropriate military

agencies by briefing or Disposition Form.

iv
FOREWORD

The Fort Hood Field Unit of the Army Research Institute for the

Behavioral and Social Sciences conducts research to develop a technology

base in support of field testing. Part of this research is to identify

learning technologies which have the potential to enhance training effectiveness and the operational proficiency of the soldier. As effective memory is vital to the performance of many military tasks, techniques for memory enhancement, i.e., mnemotechnics, constitute a

promising learning technology. This report, directed primarily to a

research audience, provides a review of the technical literature on

mnemotechnics. A research report to accompany this technical report

will be directed primarily to management and will provide examples of

how mnemonics and mnemotechnics can be incorporated into military

training.

This entire project is responsive to special requirements of the

Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel and to Army Project

2Q762722A765.

(JSEPH ZL-iDNER

Technical Director

Aceson For

NITIZSAk

DCTA unn.ounced

JatifiC -tion,

:=, .11 '. ,'o

i...i

V
Acknowled~gements

The author gratefully acknowledges the comments and suggestions

offered by Drs. Edwin R. Smutz, Tomrne k. Actkinson, and Charles 0.

Nys tr om.

vi
A Review of the Literature on Memory Enhancement: The Potential and

Relevance of Mnemotechnics for Military Training

BRIEF

Requirement:

To review the scientific and popular literature concerned with

specific techniques for enhancing memory, i.e., mnemotechnics and

to assess the potential of these mnemotechnics for military

training.

Procedure:

An extensive review was conducted of the scientific literature

on memory enhancement. A representaLive sample of popular books on

memory training was also surveyed. Conclusions were based upon, both

rational and empirical analyses.

Findings:

(1) flnemotechniics cani clearly iricrease the rate at which new

information is acquired. Accordingly, their potential for

increasing military trainin8 eifectiveness and consequent

operational proficiency is obvious. (2) A wide range of

mnemotechnics currently existb. hneiriotechrnics are already available

for such tasks as code learning and the acquisition of foreign and

technical vocabulary. Moreover, the potential for developing new

ninemotechnics for specific training problems is considerable. (3)

Only a limited amount of research has been done on rinemotechnics in

applied contexts. Given the large number of factors (e.g.,

personnel characteristics, motivational consioerations, type of

training task) that can impact on mnemotechnic effectiveness,

mnemotechnics need to be carefully researched and implemented if

their military training potential is to be fully realized.

Utilization of Finainos:

This report will be used by researcher, to identify areas of

needed research on mnemotechnics. The r,,ilitary training comnrunity

will use the report to assess the trainitiL potential of

mnemotechni cs.

vii
A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ON MEMORY ENHANCEMENT: THE POTENTIAL

AND RELEVANCE OF MNEMOTECHNICS FOR MILITARY TRAINING

CONTENTS___________

PAGE

INTRODUCTION.................................................... 1

AN OVERVIEW OF MNB'IOTECHNICS.................................. 4

Basic Principles............................................ 4

Retrieval Cues.......................................... 4

Elaboration............................................. 4

Recoding................................................ 4

Method of Loci.............................................. 4

Pegword Mnemotechnics ...................................... 5

Linking ................................................... 8

Number-Consonant Alphabet .................................. 9

Mnemotechnics for Spelling ................................ 11

Mnemotechnics for Speeqhes ................................ 11

Substitute Word or Keyword Technique ...................... 11

Mnemotechnics for Morse Code .............................. 13

A Nnemotechnic for Remembering Names and Faces ............. 16

Mnemotechnics for Pictorial Symbol Referents ............... 16

Mnemotechnics for Remembering Times and Places ............ 21

Mnemotechnic for Recognition .............................. 22

Mnemotechnics for Remembering Colors ...................... 22

Summary .................................................. 23

UTILITY OF MNEMOTECHNICS - EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION ............. 24

Method of Loci ............................................ 25

Pegword Mnemotechnics ..................................... 25

Linking Mnemotechnic....................30

Number-Consonant Alphabet.................................32

Mnemotechnics for Spelling ................................ 33

Mnemotechnics for Speeches ................................ 33

Substitute Word or Keyword Technique ...................... 33

Morse Code Mnemotechnics .................................. 36

Mnemotechnics for Remembering Names and Faces .............. 36

Mnemotechnics for Pictorial Symbol Referents ............... 36

Mnemotechnics for Remembering Times and Places ............. 37

Mnernotechnics for Recognition ............................. 38

Mnemotechnics for Remembering Colors......................38

Relative Effectiveness of Mnemotechnics for

List Learning ......................................... 38

ix
CONTENTS (continued)

Page

Principles of Effective Mnemotechnic Implementation ...... 39

Item Attributes ...................................... 39

Bizareness, Interaction, and Emotionality

of Mediators ..................................... 39

Supplied vs. Generated Mediators ..................... 40

Rehearsal ............................................ 41

Additional Considerations ................................ 42

Keeping Memories Current ............................. 42

Transfer to New Situations ........................... 42

Effects on Other Cognitive Activities ................ 44

Summary and Conclusions .................................. 46

A RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR APPLYING MNEMONICS AND

MNEMOTECHNICS TO MILITARY TRAINING ....................... 47-.1

Direct Incorporation of Mnemonics Into Training

Materials ............................................ 47

Effective Mnemonics in System Design ..................... 48

Employment of Task Specific Mnemotechnics ................ 48

General Mnemotechnical Training .......................... 49

Personnel Characteristics ................................ 49

Motivational Considerations .............................. 50

Mnemonics, Mnemotechnics, and Research

on Learning Strategies ............................... 50

REFERENCE NOTES .......................................... R-I

REFERENCES ............................................... R-1

APPENDIX

A Brief Annotated Bibliography of Some

Popular Books on Memory .......................... A-I

DISTRIBUTION ............................................ D-1

x
INTRODUCTION

Techniques designed to improve memory can be traced back to the

ancient Greeks (Yates, 1966). In ancient times training in specific

techniques to enhance memory (i.e., mnemotechnics) was an integral

part of rhetoric. Prominent persons were known for their memory

feats. Pliny the Elder (Yates, 1966, p. 41) writes of the Roman

Cyrus who knew the names of all the men in his army. Another Roman,

Lucias Scipio, was said to have known the names of all the Foman

people. Mithridates of Pontai was reported to have known the

lanbuages of' all the twenty-two peoples in his domain. The Greek

Charmudas was supposed to have known the contents of all the volumes

of a library. Yates (1966) documents the role played by the art of

,emory from the ancient Greeks and Romans through the Middle Ages up

to the time of the German philosopher and co-inventer of the

calculus, Leibnitz. Given this grand tradition, one wonders about

the demise of memory training. One could speculate that memory

training is obsolete in the age of the computer and the Xerox

machine. Research regarding how good students study, however, has

indicated that many of the better students spontaneously use

mnemotechnics of their own (Carlson, Kincaid, Lance, and Hod.son,

Indeea, contemporary psychological research and theory does

provide support regarding the utility of mnemotechnics. The notion

of modifiable processink strategies has developed within theories of

human information processing (e.g., Atkinson and Shiffrln, 1968;

Shiffrin and Atkinson, 1969). The practicai implications of this

notion are quite profound; if the manner in which individuals

process information can be modified, then individuals might be

trained to process information in an optimal manner. Consequently,

the rate at which individuals acquire information and the amount of

information they retain could potentially be enhanced. In fact, it

has been amply demonstrated that the rate at which individuals

acquire and retain information can be enhanced through the use of

mremotechnics. A review of these mnemotechnics and the empirical

evidence bearing upon their effectiveness is provided in this

review.

Given that mnemotechnics have been around for literally

thousands of years, and given that modern psychological research has

resurrected interest in these mnemotechnics, the immediate question

arises regarding the potential of these mnemotechnics for the

military. A teciinoloby which increases the rate at which

individuals learn has obvious training benefits. In turn, these

training benefits should be reflected in operational effectiveness.

The first contract research done for the military on memory

enhancement was a report, done in 1957, by Ullace, Turner and

Perkins (Note 1). Using a mnerfotechnic at a self-paced rate their

subjects were able to recall up to 300 items perfectly. Even with
700 pairs of' items, recall was of the magnitude of 95%. Several

years later, Senter (1965) produced a report for the Aerospace

Medical Research Laboratories which argued strongly for the

application of mnemotechnics to training. In 1977, the Interservice

Procedures for Instructional Systems Development called for the use

of memory aids (mnemonics) in curriculum development. To address

the issue as to how mnemonics could be incorporated into training

materials, the Navy's Training Analysis and Evaluation Group (TAEG)

developed a guidebook for technical writers to assist them in

incorporating mnemonics into training materials (Braby, Kincaid, and

Aagard, 1978). By using this approach Ainsworth (1979) was able to

develop mnemonics which increased the rate of acquisition of Morse

Code.

In spite of the above, very little use is made of mnemonics in

training, and there is practically no formal mnemotechnical training

in any of the services. Moreover, it is mistake to think that the

application of mnemotechnics and mnemonics is a straightforward

matter. Questions regarding what trainin6 materials should employ

wnemonics and who should be given mnemotechnical training are very

important. The final chapter of this report presents a research

strategy for applying mnemonics and mnemotechnics to military

training. The basic position of this report is that mnneonics and

mnemotechnics represent a promising training technology. However,

if this technology is not carefully researchea and implemented, this

potential will be either lost or greatly mitigated. Prior to

discussing this researth strategy, a chapter will be devoted to a

discussion of most of the common mnemotechnics currently available,

followed by a chapter reviewing the experimental literature bearing

upon these mnemotechnics.

To understand how memory enhancement works, it is first

necessary to understand what constitutes successful remembering.

Generally speaking, successful remembering requires what Bartlett

(1932) termed "an effort after meaning." That is, memorable

information is meaningful information. When the information to he

remembered is meaningful to the potential learner, then use can be

aiaae of the meaningful structure of the material itself as a

mnemonic device. For example, most prose materials should be

meaningful to the potential learner. Questions regarding optimal

methods of processing prose materials constitute an important

research area in their own right. (see Dansereau, Collins, McDonald,

Holiey, Garland, Diekhoff & Evans, 1919; Higbee, 1977; O'Neal,

1978). The current paper, however, is also concerneu with a

somewhat more intractable problem; i.e., the retention of materials

that are not initially meaningful to the learner. Examples of

essentially meaningless materials include lists, dates, most

numbers, basically anything which appears arbitrary. At the outset

of many different courses of instruction potentially meaningful

imaterial often appears meaningless. For example, for beginning

2
students, foreign words, and many principles and procedures are

apparently meaningless. As a result, many students experience

difficulty trying to learn such information.

Mnemotechnics are processing strategies developed specifically

for remembering information which is apparently meaningless. They

are special techniques which impose meaning and organization on

apparently meaningless material. As a consequence of this imposed

organization and meaning, the retention of nominally meaningless

information is enhanced.

Although the terms mnemonics and mnemotechnics are often used

interchangeably, in this paper they will have definite and distinct

meanings. The distinction employed in this paper is essentially

identical to that made by Senter (1965). basically the term

"mnemonic" will refer to a specific aid to memory. For example, the

name Roy U. Biv is a mnemonic, a first letter mnemonic, for the

colors of the spectrum. All acronyms are mnemonics, or at least

purport to ioe mnemonics, their efficacy sometimes being in doubt.

Any specific mediator, be it verbal, imaginal, or whatever, will

also be regarded as a mnemonic. In distinction, a mnemotechnic is a

system for generating mnemonics which attempt to solve a memory

problem.

This paper will provide a description of common mnemontechnics.

It will then review the experimental and other empirical evidence

bearing upon the effectiveness of mnemotechnics. Finally, the paper

will provide a focus for further research and development.

OBJECTIVES

1) To provide a list and description of the most common ninemotechnics.

2) To provide an assessment of the general utility of

mnemotechnics.

3) To provide a research strategy for applying mnemonics and

mneinotechnics to military training.

3
AN OVERVIEW OF MNEMOTECHNICS

The following list, while not claiming to be exhaustive, does

present a fairly comprehensive description of mnemotechnics. Before

discussing individual mnemotechnics, however, it would do well to

enumerate a few basic principles common to all techniques.

Basic Principles

Retrieval Cues: If no, or few, retrieval cues for recall are

provided in the to-be-remembered material, the mnemotechnic will

supply specific retrieval cues. Typically, the retrieval cues of

the mnemotechnics are systematic, thus allowing the individual to

ascertain whether he has recalled all the required material.

Elaboration: All mnemotechnics involve some Sort of mental

elaboration whereby the to-be-recalled material is linked to the

retrieval cue. The most commonly recommended type of mental

elaboration is visual imagery. For example, say that the retrieval

cue was "shoe" and the word to be remembered was "tire." The visual

image linking these two words might be a mental picture of a shoe

kicking a tire. Later, when the term "shoe" is presented, it should

elicit the image of the shoe kicking the tire, allowing the recall

of' the term "tire." Although visual imagery is the most commonly

recomnended form of mental elaboration, other means of linking

(e.g., sentences, phrases) are also sometimes recommended.

Recoding: Very often some recoding is required before the

mnemotechnic can be employed. When abstract materials are

encountered it is almost always necessary to recode them into a more

concrete form before an injage can be generated. Say, for example,

that the wora pair, government-religion was to be learned by forming

a visual image. As both terms represent abstract concepts, they

must each be recoded into concrete representations before an image

can be formed. Accordingly, government could be recoded as the

Capitol Building and religion could be recoded as the Pope. Then an

image relating the two terms might consist of the Pope climbing up

the Capitol Building. Very often the success in the implementation

of a rtnemotechnic will be dependent on an individual's ability to

recode. One mnemotechnic to be discussed, the number consonant

alphabet, is concerned primiarily with the recoding of numerical

information.

Jethod of Loci

Perhaps the oldest mnemotechnic, dating from the ancient Greeks

(Yates, 1966), is the method of loci. In this technique the

retrieval cues are the loci, which are especially selected well

known places. The information which one desires to recall is

mentally placed in the different loci by means of visual imagery.

4
Say, for example, that the task is to remember the following list at

the grocery store: milk, hot dogs, beer, asparagus, bananas,

popcorn, and bread. One might use the following areas of his house

as loci: sidewalk, front door, mailbox, garage, chimney, roof, and

patio. One then places mentally via visual images,,the milk on the

sidewalk, the hot dogs on the front door, the beer in the mailbox,

the asparagus in the garage, the bananas around the chimney, the

popcorn on the roof, and the bread on the patio. At the

supermarket, the individual needs only to conjure up the images of

the house to remember what was needed at the store. Greek and Roman

orators used this same technique for somewhat more esoteric

purposes. Columns in the halls where they spoke were sometimes used

as the loci. The various parts of their speeches, recoded as

concrete representations, were then placed at the different columns.

The speaker would then use each column to remind himself of the

successive topics of his speech.

Pegword Mnemotechnics:

The numeric pegword technique is essentially the same as the

method of loci except that numerical pegwords replace familiar

locations as the retrieval cues. The most popular and easiest to

learn version of the numeric pegword technique is commonly called

the one bun rhyme mnemonic. To use this technique the individual

must first memorize rhyme pegwords for the digits one through ten.

For example, one is a bun, two is a shoe, three is a tree, four is a

door, five is a hive, six is sticks, seven is heaven, eight is gate,

nine is wine, and ten is hen. Each item to be remembered is then

linked to the rhyme pegword, typically by a visual image.

Accordingly, if the following list of items was to be learned:

I - Helicopter

2 - Rifle

3 - Jeep

4 - Desk

5 - House

6 - Religion

7 - Poverty

8 - Bravery

9 - Law

10 - Wealth

one might form the following images:

5
1. a Helicopter enwrapped in a bun

2. a Rifle stuck in a shoe

3. a Jeep up in a tree

4. a Desk blocking a door

5. a House underneath a beehive

6. the Pope (religion) picking up sticks

7. a group of poor people (Poverty) in heaven

8. some outnumbered soldiers (Bravery) defending a gate

9. a judge (Law) drinking a jug of wine

10. a hen laying a golden egg (Wealth)

It should be noted that because the last five concepts were

abstract, they were recoded as concrete representations. It should

also be noted that as the retrieval cues are numbers, information so

encoded can be recalled either in or out of sequential order. By

knowing how many items are to be recalled, the technique also

provides a means of ascertaining whether all the desired information

has been recalled.

The Navy's Training Analysis and Evaluation Group (TAEG) has

employed the rhyme pegword mnemotechnic to train recruits on "Orders

to the Sentries." After instruction on the rhyme pegword the

recruits were given illustrated booklets. On each page was an

illustration of the pegword and an image representation of the order

appropriate to the numerical pegword.

Although rhyme words can be developed for as many digits as

desired, proficient mnemonists tend not to use rhyme words as

pegwords. In more advanced systems the numeric pegwords are based

on the phonetic alphabet. The phonetic alphabet is discussed in

more detail in a following section.

It is also useful to have pegwords based on the letters of the

alphabet. Consider the following:

A - Ape J - Junk S - Sailor

b - Bum K - King T - Talk

C - Cat L - Lemon U - Uncle

D - Dog M - Million V - Vasoline

E - Egg N - Nephew W - Woman

F - Fox 0 - Ox X - Xylophone

G - Guy P - Prisoner Y - Yak

H - House Q - Queen Z - Zebra

I - Inuian R - Rear

(American)

6
In a military context consideration should be given to using the

military's phonetic alphabet. The military phonetic alphabet is

presented below:

A - Alfa J - Juliett S - Sierra

B - Bravo K - Kilo T - Tango

C - Charlie L - Lima U - Uniform

D - Delta M - Mike V - Victor

E - Echo N - November W - Whiskey

F - Foxtrot 0 - Oscar X - X-ray

G - Golf P - Papa Y - Yankee

H - Hotel Q - Quebec Z - Zulu

I - India R - Romeo

One disadvantage to using pegwords based on the military

phonetic alphabet is that some of the pegwords are abstract, thus,

theoretically at least, increasing the difficulty of generating

interactive images based upon them. Nevertheless, with sufficient

imagination, these pegwords can be used successfully. By employing

multiple systems of pegwords (e.g., the two systems based on the

alphabet presented here, plus the one numeric system presented here

and the one to be presented later), one is simply enhancing one's

flexibility for dealing with memory tasks.

7

.... . .... ...... ..... l ll l . ... .. .. I . . . . . .
Linking

Linking can be employed whenever a serial list or chain of

associations is to be learned. Basically the technique involves

using each recalled item as the retrieval cue for the succeeding

item. Take, for example, the task of learning the following chain

of command; President, Secretary of Defense, Secretary of the Army,

Chief' of Staff, FORSCOt Commander, Corps Commander, Division

Commander, Brigade Commander, Battalion Commander, and Company

Commander. One could link these elements as follows: the first

image could be of the President talking to a secretary who is acting

defensively and who has a big "D" on her sweater (Secretary of

Defense); this secretary could, in turn, be pictured speaking to

another secretary who is wearing an army uniform (The Secretary of

the Army); then one could imagine this secretary speaking to an

Indian Chief holding a staff (the Chief of Staff); one could then

imagine this Indian Chief with a staff trying to halt a large mass

of forces coming (FORSCO ); then one could mentally picture these

forces coming (FORSCOM) and overrunning a commander leading some

apple cores (Corps Commander). Next, these apple cores could divide

into divisions with commanders (Division Commander). One division

could then be herded into a brig (brigade); then one could imagine

battalion colors being (Battalion Commander) placed outside the

brig. Finally, one could imagine these battalion colors being

placed outside a company store (Company Commander).

The foregoing might seem somewhat bizarre. It should be

realized, however, that these mental gymnastics accomplish two

purposes. First of all, they focus attention on the learning of the

task at hand; and secondly, they recode abstract verbal information

into a more readily accessible visual memory. It should also be

noted that the pegword method could also be used to learn the chain

of command simply by placing each level of the chain of command with

its appropriate pegword. Although the pegwords might appear

somewhat superfluous in the present case, they do offer one

advantage. When the linking technique is used if one link in the

chain is lost, it is possible that the entire chain might be lost.

This danger does not present itself when pegwords are used.

Sometimes the linking mnemotechnic is referred to as the story

mnemotechnic. Essentially, the linking aspect of the technique is

maintained, except that in the story mnemotechnic the emphasis is

placed on using a story to link successive items rather than on

visual images.'In the case of highly imageable items, it is very

likely that the result of the two techniques is equivalent. In the

case of abstract items, however, the use of a story to link items

can eliminate the need to recode items as visual images.
Number-Consonant Alphabet

Any advanced system of mnemotechnics requires a technique for

remembering numbers. The number-consonant alphabet represents the

most common mnemotechnic for remembering numbers. According to

Higbee (1977, p.136) the origin of the number-consonant alphabet can

be traced back to 1648 when a mnemonist named Winckelman is

purported to have introduced a digit-letter system. The technique

involves the recoding of numbers as consonant sounds. Take the

following recoding scheme: 1 = t,d,th; 2 = n; 3 = m; 4 = r; 5 = 1;

6 = j, g (soft), ch, sh; 7 = k, c (hard) g (hard), ng; 8 = v, f, ph;

9 = p, b; 0 = c (soft), s, z. This technique, when mastered, allows

the ready memorization of strings of numbers. Consider, for

example, the task of memorizing the following serial number:

007423480. The number-consonant alphabet could be used to recode

the digit string as follows:

sees a cow ruin my roofs

(0) (0) (7) (4) (2) (3) (4)(8)(0)

This phrase could in turn be elaborated further by forming an irpage

of yourself watching a cow (presumably the same one who jumped over

the moon) ruin your house and garage roofs by jumping on them. Or

consider the task of learning the following phone numbers: 532-9826

and 532-1316. The 532 prefix can be recoded as "lawmen." The

phrase "buff Nash" can be used to recode 9826, and the phrase "time

ddsh" can be used to recooe 1316. Accordingly one could form images

of lawmen buffing a Nash and timing a dash to remember the

respective phone numbers. One can link these images in turn to the

images of the person or activity the numbers belong to.

One can similarly employ the number consonant alphabet to

memorize the effective ranges of different weapons. For example, to

remember that the main gun range of the T-55 tank is 1,500 meters,

one could recode the T-55 tank as "Lulu (55) doing the tango" and

firing her gun at "two lasses" (1,500); or to remember that the main

gun range of the M-1970 medium tank is 2,000 meters one could

imagine "Mike", the "top cuss" (M-1970) firing at some "nice sauce"

(2,000).

As was mentioned above, all advanced mnemotechnics tend to make

heavy use of the number-consonant alphabet. Numeric pegwords in

advanced systems are based on the number-consonant alphabet. Below

are listed numeric pegwords, from 1 to 100 which are based on the

number-consonant alphabet.

9
1. Tie 26. Notch 51. Lot 76. Cash

2. Noah 27. Neck 52. Lawn 77. Cook

3. Ma 28. Knife 53. Lamb 79. Cave

4. Hye 29. Knob 54. Lair 79. Cab

5. Law 30. Mouse 55. Lulu 80. Vice

6. Shoe 31. Mutt 56. Lush 81. Vat

7. Cow 32. Man 57. Lake 82. Fin

8. Ivy 33. Mummy 58. Lava 83. Fun

9. Bee 34. Mare 59. Lap 84. Fear

10. Toes 35. Mail 60. Shoes 85. Fool

11. Tot 36. Mush 61. Shot 86. Fish

12. Tin 37. Mug 62. Shin 87. Fig

13. Tomb 38. Movie 63. Sham 88. F i fe

14. Tire 39. Map 64. Chair 89. Fop

15. Towel 40. Rose 65. Jail 90. Puss

16. Dish 41. Rat 66. Choo Choo 91. Pot

17. Tack 42. Rain 67. Shuck 92. Pin

18. Dove 43. Ram 68. Shave 93. Bum

1j. Tub 44. Rower 69. Ship 94. Beer

20. Nose 45. Rail 70. Case 95. Pail

21. Net 46. Rush 71. Cat 96. Lush

22. Nun 47. Rack 72. Cane 97. Buck

2J. Unome 48. Hoof 73. Coma 98. Beef

24. Nair 49. Rope 74. Car 99. Ree Bet,

25. Nail 50. Louse 75. Coal I00. Doses

10
Mnemotechnics for Spelling

A variety of mnemotechnical approaches can be taken towards the

problem of spelling. At one level, an attempt can be made to develop

specific mnemonics for each problem word. For example, the phrase

"piece of pie" can serve as a mnemonic for remembering that "i"

precedes "e" in "piece." However, at a more general level, mnemonics

can be used to prescribe rules of spelling. For example, one could

remember that "i" precedes "e" in "piece" from the rhyme mnemonic

rule,

"ill before "ell except after "c"

or when sounded a

as in neighbor and weigh.

Some of the general mnemotechnical systems can also be applied

to spelling problems. The basic tactic is to employ words denoting

letters of the alphabet (e.g., the cue words from an alphabetic

pegword system). Theoretically, one could then use these words in

conjunction with either a linking mnemotechnic or a numeric pegword

mnemotechnic. In all likelihood, however, such an approach would

prove too cumbersome to be practical. -It would appear more feasible

to use the alphabetic cue words on an ad hoc basis. For example, to

remember that separate is spelled separate rather that seperate, a

mnemonic image could be formed of an Ape separating some bushes.

fnemotechnics for Speeches

Mnemotechnics for speeches are as old as the art of memory

itself. It will be remembered that the method of loci was initially

developed as an aid for remembering speeches and was a fundamental

rhetorical skill in ancient times (Yates, 1966). Although the

method of loci has historical precedence, both pegword and linking

mnemotechnics were appropriate for the memorizing of speeches. The

method is quite simple. First images are formed for each of the key

ideas in the to-be-memorized speech. Then those images are either

linked together in their appropriate order or are placed in their

respective loci or with their respective pegwords. It should be

noted that these mnemotechnics are not intended for memorizing

speeches verbatim. Rather they are intended for remembering all the

successive topics of a speech in appropriate order. The topics are

then to be "talked."

Substitute Word or Keyword Technique

The substitute word or keyword technique is a mnemotechnic

designed for the acquisition of new vocabulary words. This

mnemotechnic consists of two component steps. The first step

11
requires the development of a substitute word or keyword based on

the sound of the vocabulary word. The second step involves linking

the keyword or substitute word to the meaning of the target word via

a visual image. Before illustrating the' technique it would be

useful to make a distinction between substitute words and keywords.

Although each technique involves the recoding of the target word in

terms of its sound, a substitute word is based on the entire sound

of the target word, whereas a keyword is based on only part of the

sound of the target word. Although books on memory development

(e.g., Lorayne & Lucas, 1974) have recommended using substitute

words, the limited experimental work on the topic (e.g., Raugh &

Atkinson, 1974, 1975) has indicated that keywords are preferable.

The technique could be used to learn the Spanish word for horse,

caballo (pronounced cab'eye o), as follows: first a substitute word

or phrase (a cab eyeing an "o") or a keyword (eye would be

developed based on the sound of the target word. Next, an image

would be generated linking the meaning of the target word to the

substitute phrase (a cab eyeing the (o) mark on a horse), or keyword

(a cyclopean horse).

It should be noted that this mnemotechnic is not applicable

solely for foreign vocabulary. It can also be used for learning new

or technical terms in one's native vocabulary. Essentially, the

mnemotechnic, as do all others, provides a way of imbuingmeaning to

apparently nonsensical material. And most unlearned vocabulary,

native, technical, or foreign, is initially nonsensical.

12
Mnemotechnics for Morse Code

Harry Lorayne, a renowned memory expert, has developed a

mnemotechnic for acquiring Morse Code. As he tells the story

(Lorayne & Lucas, 1974), he developed the technique when he was

serving as a private in the Signal Corps. He approached his

commander with the mnemotechnic claiming that by using the technique,

the men could learn Morse Code in thirty minutes. He says his

commander turned him down, asking what would he do with the men for

the remainder of the cycle.

Lorayne's (1957) technique involves the recoding of the dots as

"r" sounds, and the dashes as 'It", "th", or I'd" sounds (e.g., a, .- ,

could be recoded as rat). However, Dr. Edwin Smutz has suggested

that the recoding scheme would be more phonetically compatible if

Lorayne's scheme were revised (i.e., dots as 'It", 1"th", or "d" sounds

and the dashes as "r" sounds). After all, the r sound is broader

and, accordingly, more approriately recoded as a dash. Consider the

following recodings based upon Dr. Smutz' scheme.

A .- tar N -. rout

B -... rotted 0 --- rah rah rah

C -.=-.'retread P .--. throw rod

D -.. red day Q --.- rear tire

E 'tee R .-. tired

F ..-. tight ride S ... dud day

G --. roared T - ray

H .... toot toot U ..- tot chair

I .. tutu V ...- tooted horn

J .--- terror W .-- dear rye

K -.- rater X -..- rudder

L .-.. dear tot Y -.-- rat roar

M -- rear Z --. rare dude

These recodings of the Morse Code can then be linked to their

respective alphabetic representations by using alphabetic pegwords.

Vivid images can be generated to form these links. Printed below is

a set of' descriptions of images, linking letters of the phonetic

alphabet to the recoaed Morse Code.

13
A The Greek letter alpha dripping with tar

-... Spectators yelling Bravo from a rotted stadium

C Charlie buying a retread

D- A red day over the Delta

E A tee shot sounding an echo in the woods

F Doing the foxtrot on a tight ridn

U - The crowd roared at the golf shot

H .... A hotel whistling toot toot

I India wearing a tutu

J Juliet being in terror for her life .

K A rater evaluating a Kilo

L A dear tot in Lima, Peru

M -- A mike at the rear of the studio

N -. a 56-0 rout in November

0 --- Oscar cneering rah rah rah

F P°Papa throwing a rod

Q Having a flat rear tire in Quebec

h A tired Romeo after a hard nightS . A dud day in the Sierra Mountains

T - Ray doing the tango

U Your uncle fixing a tot chair

V ...- Celebrating a Victory with a tooted horn

W .-- Drinking whiskey and dear rye

X -. A rudder being x-rayed

Y -.-- A Yankee hearing a rat roar

Z A Zulu, a rare dude

14
Of course, the above image mnemonics are idiosyncratic to the

author. Different individuals should generate whatever images work

best for them. If the images are to be supplied as part of the

training materials, then the best images, in terms of learning

efficiency, should be determined empirically.

The Naval Training Analysis and Evaluation Group (TAEG) have

developed a set of pictorial mnemonics for learning Morse Code.

Their mnemotechnic incorporates the dots and dashes directly into the

mnemonic picture, (e.g., 3 SIERhA Mountains 4 HOTEL

windows ; TANGO dancers

In short, there is no dearth of mnemotechnics for the learning of

4orse Code.

!5
A Mnemotechnic for Remembering_ Names and Faces

The most commonly heard lament about memory failures is, "I can

never remember a name, but I alwayE remember a face." According to

some notions, this discrepancy is a result of visual information,

the face, being inherently more memorable than lerbal information,

the name. Lorayne (1975) has devoted an entire book to this

problem. A solution to this problem is to recode the verbal

information into a visual image. The retrieval cue in this

inemotechnic is a salient feature of the to be remembered

individual's face. Say, for example, that Mr. Van Cott has a very

large nose. One might form an image of a Van with a cot and a man

sleeping in it, his big nose snoring. Or, consider Ir. Liebowitz

who has a furrowed brow. One might imagine liverwurst covering his

brow. Or, consider Ms. Goldstein who has sensuous lips. One might

imagine her lips drinking from a golden stein. For those who might

experience difficulty forming picturable equivalents of names,

Lorayne has published lists of common names recoded so as to form

picturable equivalents.

Mnemotechnics for Pictorial Symbol Referents

In a sense, the need for mnemotechnics for pictorial materials

presents somewhat of a paradox. Typically, a mnemotechnic involves

recoding verbal material into a picturable equivalent, as visual

information appears to be superior, mnemonically speaking, to verbal

information. However, in the use of pictorial symbols we begin with

visual information which is presumably highly memorable. The

resolution to this apparent paradox is that the memory problem

usually does not concern the memory of the symbol itself, but rather

the referent of the symbol, that is, the verbal or semantic

information.

All mnemotechnics for pictorial information involve some sort of

elaboration based on the sign relating it to the meaning of the

sign. The Naval TAEG group at Orlando, Florida has developed a

mnemotechnic for learning the meanings of Navy signal flags (Braby,

Kincaid, & Aagard, 1978). They have developed specific mnemonics

for each signal flag. In certain cases the mnemonic consists simply

of' a meaningful elaboration relating the flag to its meaning. For

example, the flag for "b" (Bravo) is colored red and shaped as

follows:

The mnemonic is that the Red flag is a Bullfighters cape and the

crowd is yelling BRAVO for him.

16
Or, the flag for "E" (Echo) has a blue top and a red bottom and

is shaped as follows:

Here the mynemonic is "Blue sky - Red Earth."

Sometimes the mnemonic also consists of an elaboration of the

picture itself. For example, the flag for "H" (Hotel) is as follows

(the right half is colored red and the 1Ift half white): Eli

The mnemonic is comprised of th"e followin{:

}Red light district Hotel

AOTr.

Griffith and Actkinson (1976) developed a mneiotechnic for

instruction on international road signs which employed mnemonics for

individual signs which elaborated specific features of the zsir, I

relating these features to the sign 's meanin,. For example, the

sign for Autobahn Detour was:

The innemolic was. "..concetntrate on the "U" in the sigri. 1, nhk of

the"U" detouring you around something."

Weirnstein (1978) has employed a similar inemhotechnic in wilich,

individuals are encouraged to develop their own imnemonics in which

they use a feature of the sign to relate the sign to its meaningq.

The problem of remembering the meaning of pictorial symbols is

widespread. In fact, written Chinese coris:zL: solely of i(heoi.r,.;'L,.

17
i.e., pictorial symnbclis. The Chinese do not employ a phonetic

alphabet (i.e., an alphabet based on the sounds of the language),

but use, rather, a UniqUe pictorilA representation for each word in

the language. Presented below are some Chinese characters. their

meanings, and some mnemonic cues which might prove useful in

remembering the meanings of the symbols.
Characters Meanings Mnemonic Cues

Sun Think of the sun corring

through the window

Mloon Think of a ladder to the moon

*Fire Think of a man running fromi

fire

WJater Think of aoceedsiuer

thirsty for water

*Tree Think of a tree growinp

through the top of a mnountain

Uold An arrow planted in tht. earth

with a carat on top 1eiarks the

place where Gcld is to he

f ouflo

Eartii Think< of a cros~s planted in

mfm 

the ear-th

19
Military symbols provide another instance in which there is a

problem regardinb reiemberin6 the meanings of pictorial symbols.

Although FM21-30 (Military Symbols) does present something in the

way of mnemonic cues for a few of the symbols, by and large, the

student is left to fend For himself in learning military symbols.

Presented below are some of the basic military symbols, their

meanings, and some mnemonic cues which might prove helpful.

_y_bol Meanings Mnemonics

A unit Picture a unit standing

in a rectangular formation

A heaaquarters Imagine a flag flying above 4 or element of a headquarters

headquarters

An observation Imagine a lookout climbinL

or listening to the top of a hill to

post observe or lister,

I A combat service Imagine a boxcar carrying

support element cortbat service support

of a U. 3.

conbat unit

00

20
O A combat service Think of trying to keep the

installation or ball rolling at a combat

activity service support activity

Mnemotechnics for emembering Times and Places

lnemotechnics for remembering times and places requires a

thorough profiency with the number-consonant alphabet. Say, for

example, you have to remember that you have a dental appointment at

1430. First, you would need to recode the time by using the

number-consonant alphabet. Fourteen thirty could be recoded as

"tire mouse". Tire mouse could then be elaborated further into a

mental image of a mouse sleeping in a tire. This mental image could

then be transported to the place of your appointment, e.g., Dental

Clinic #4. (By the way, if you needed to remember the number of the

dental clinic you could simply imagine the dentists drinking a

bottle of rye). Or suppose you needed to remember Colonel Sanders

at the airfield at 1610. You need only imagine Colonel Sanders and

you at the airport while you drop a dish on your toes (1610).

21
Mnemotechnic for Recognition

Practically all mnemotechnics are concerned with recall. In

recall the target information must be retrieved from memory.

Basically mnemotechnics provide a system of retrieval cues and a means of readily accessing memory via the retrieval cue. In recognition memory, the target information is presented again and

the task is to identify the target information as old. A basic

mnemotechnic for recognition memory is to mark mentally the

to-be-recognized information. This mental marking can consist of

recoding the information as an image and then, perhaps, further

marking the information by setting fire to it, tearing it up, etc.

Mnemotechnics for Remembering Colors

An obvious means of improving memory for colors is to provide

names for the colors. Indeed, it appears that naming a stimulus

array assists memory (Bartlett, 1932). A somewhat more intractable

problem involves the matching of hues from memory. This problem is

difficult in that the color vocabulary of most people is

impoverished relative to the richness of their color experiences.

To compensate for this deficiency Siegel and Siegel (1976) have

developed a mnemotechnic to improve memory for color. The first

part of the mnemotechnic is to learn the following hue diamond:

YELLOW (25)

GREEN (15) RED (35)

\O/40

BLUE (5)

The numbers in parentheses were used to represent the four

psychologically distinct hues. Individuals then interpolate

appropriate numerical values for various mixtures of the corner

colors (e.6. 10 for a precise 50-50 blue green mixture).

22
Summary

A wide variety of mnemotechnics has been discussed. Although

they are capable of dealing with an impressive range of memory

problems, they have all been developed from the basic principles

introduced at the beginning of this section, i.e., the provision for

retrieval cues, mental elaboration, and recoding. The linking and

pegword mnemnotechnics are fundamental to even the most rudimentary

system of mnemotechnics. The loci mnemotechnic appears to offer

fewer advantages than the pegword mnemotechnic, and, therefore

appears to be mainly of historical interest. Besides providing a

means for readily memorizing numbers, a knowledge of the

number-consonant alphabet is required for many advanced

mnemotechnics.

Some of the remaining mnemotechnics, e.g., those for Morse Code

learning and those for symbol memory, have obvious applications to

military training. The direct application of some other

mnemotechnics to military training might not be readily apparent.

However, there was a purpose for discussing such inemotechnics. And

that purpose was to demonstrate the wide variety of tasks to which

mnemotechnics are applicable. It should be appreciated that most

mnemotechnics have been developed by professional mnemonists and

stage magicians for th express purpose of entertaining audiences

with their mental prowess. However, in the course of developing

these "stunts" they employed, albeit informally, sound principles of

human factors engineering. Essentially, they performed a task

analysis of' the feat they wanted to perform and then designed a

strategy to accomplish that end. Memory problems became exercises

in problem solving. The solutions to these problems were the

development of specific mnemnotechnics. Basically, this same

approach can be followed with respect to military training problems.

Training tasks need to undergo task analysis. The memory component

of the training task needs to be delineated, then mnemotechnics can

be developed to address the particular memory demands of the task.

Only recently has the problem of developing mnemonics and

mnemotechnics for training materials even been addressed (see Braby,

Kincaid & Aagard, 1976). One may contend that the surface of this

problem has only been scratched.

The next section will review the experimental research, what

little there is of it, that directly addresses the utility of the

mriemotechics discussed in this section.

Although each of the above mnemotechnics will be discussed

individually, it will be seen that little or no research has been

directly addressed to many of the specific mnemotechnics.

23
Utility of Mnemotechnics - Experimental Evaluation

In the typical experimental paradigin employed to assess the

utility of mnemotechnics, the performance of a group instructed in

the use of a mnemotechnic is compared against one or both of the

following control groups: (1) a noninstructed control, i.e., a group

werely instructed to perform a task and given no clue as to how they

might best perform it, and/or (2) a rote rehearsal control, i.e., a

group instructed to learn material merely by repeating it over and

over again to themselves. When assessed in this manner the group

instructed in the mnemotechnic typically outperforms the control

group(s). This type of experiment can be found ad nauseam in the

literature. A comprehensive review can be found in Paivio (1971).

Typically the central focus in research on mnemotechnics has not

been on the mnemotechnic per se, but rather upon some underlying

theoretical process or construct that the mnemotechnic putatively

involves. As mnemotechnics tend to rely rather heavily on imagery

processes, it is not too surprising that mnemotechnics have been

used extensively to investigate the theoretical construct of

imagery. Paivio's monumental Imagery and Verbal Processes (1971)

reports many studies on mnemotechnics, but they all are reported to

validate the imagery construct or to elucidate Paivio's dual

process coding theory.

Consequently, out of the multitude of research studies that have

employed mnemotechnics, only a handful have focused on the

effectiveness of the mnemotechnic per se. In fact, most of the

research has employed standard learning paradigms from experimental

psychology, e.g., paired associate, serial learning, free recall,

recognition, verbal discrimination, rather than a specific

mnemotechnic, e.g., pegword, loci, number-consonant alphabet. All

the mnemotechnics listed in the preceding section will be discussed

in this section. Where there is experimental evidence bearing upon

the mnemotechnic, it will be discussed; where there is no

experimental evidence, the lacuna will be duly noted. After each

specific mnemotechnic has been discussed, experimental evidence

bearing upon which mnemotechnics are most effective for list

learning will be reviewed. The folluwing section will discuss

principles of effective lnemotechnic implementation. Next some

additional considerations regarding rnnetrotechnics will be discussed,

followed by a summary and conclusion section.
Method of Loci

One of the most frequently cited experimental references on the

method of loci is that of Ross and Lawrence (1968). Subjects

instructed in the method of loci were able to recall 38 out of 40

items presented once at a 13 second/item rate. One day later they

were able to recall 34 out of 40 of these same items.

Unfortunately, Ross and Lawrence did not employ a control group.

Subsequently, Groninger (1971) did employ a control group. He found

that not only did the subjects instructed in the method of loci

learn a list of 25 words faster than the control group ('Z= 13 min

49 sec vs. 17 min 11 sec), but they also exhibited superior recall

one week and five weeks later. The Groninber study, as do most

studies on mnemotechnics, employed college students as subjects.

.{obertson, Tchabo, Hausman, and Arenberb (1976) used senior citizens

sixty years or older as subjects. Using a pretest-postest design

they found that the control group demonstrated lower pretest-postest

improvement than did the experimental group using the method of

loci.

Crovitz did a series of studies examining specific issues

regarding the method of loci. In one study Crovitz (1969) claims to

have found that memory loci did not have to be memorized to be

effective. He found that when mnemory loci (i.e., locations on an

artificial map) were shown to subjects average recall was

thirty-four correct out of forty items. Crovitz did not employ a

control group. It should also be noted that Montague and Carter

(Note 2) found that learners should make up their own loci in order

for them to be effective. In another study, Briggs, Hawkins, and

Crovitz (1970) found that not only is it unnecessary for the loci to

be memorized, but that it is also unnecessary that the association

between the loci and the to-be-recalled iteris be generated by the

learner. They found that average recall was seventeen out of twenty

items. This conclusion needs to be regarded with some skepticism as

again, no control group was included. Moreover, research using

paired-associates (e.g., Bobrow arid Bower, 1969, Griffith, 1976)

indicates that subject-generated mediators are superior to

experimenter supplied mediators. Crovitz's (Note 3) third study

indicated that a list of loci does not help subjects unless the

subjects are trained in making effective visual associations.

Pegword Mnemotechnics

Compared to other mnemotecinics, the experimental evaluation of

pegword mnemotechnics has been extensive. The first experimental

analysis, reported in the United States at least, of a commercial

memory technique was done by Smith and Noble (1965). They

investigated the effectiveness of a hook (pegword) technique, based

on the number-consonant alphabet, for learning serial 10-item lists

of low, medium, and high scaled meaningfulness. Experimental

25
subjects received a one hour lecture on the technique and were given

four days to practice the technique in ,private. Control subjects

learned the serial lists, without any specific instructions

regarding mnemonic techniques. In addition to the instructions

provided the experimental group, the experiment proper consisted of

a learning phase followed by a recall and relearning phase 21 hours

later. Although the two groups did not differ significantly1 during

the initial learning phase, the mnemotechnic did significantly

enhance performance during recall and relearning. The mnemotechnic

did interact with item meaningfulness in that no differences

occurred for lists of high meaninbfulness, large differences in

favor of the mneinotechnic under medium meaningfulness, and small

differences in favor of the mnemotechnic for lists of low

meaningfulness. One might attempt to explain these results by

arguing that high meaningfulness materials could be readily learned

and hence did not require a mnemotechnic, and that low

meaningfulness materials were too difficult to use a mnemotechnic

effectively. besides being ad hoc, such an explanation finds no

support elsewhere in the literature.

Senter and Hauser (1968) obtained somewhat differert results

from Smith and Noble (1965) using a very similar technique. Senter

and Hauser provided a combined demonstration and training session on

the hook (pegword) technique which lasted for 1/2 hour and was given

one week before the experiment proper. Subjects learned a list of

20 CVC trigrams by the method of serial anticipation; i.e.,

individual CVC's were presented sequentially and subjects were to

provide the next CVC in the sequence. Feedback was provided and

they were to anticipate the next item, and so forth. The CVC list

alternated items of 0% association value with items of 100%,

association value. The hook (pegword) tnemotechnic proved effective

at both levels of association value.

A criticism of the two preceding studies was that control

subjects received less pretesting practice than did the experimental

subjects. This criticism was avoided somewhat in an experiment Ly

kerla, Persensky, and Senter (196v). In their experiment control

subjects were given the same amount of pretest training, i.e., they

learned the pegword, and the practice lists, although they were not

instructed as to how to employ the pegwords in the mnemotechnic.

The primary depenident measure in this experiment was the time

required to learn the list of 20 words. rhe list was learned

significantly faster by individuals employing the peg mnemotechnic.

This experiment also compared the perforancE of' subjects for whOom

1Wheriever the tern, significant difitrence is employed it refers to

an alpha level of .05. Sometimes, however, the obtained "p"

values were less than .05.
the pegwords were provided during recall against the performance of

subjects who had to provide the pegwords themselves during recall.

Interestingly enough, individuals who were provided with the pegword

during recall took longer to learn the test list than did

individuals who had to provide the pegword implicitly. Persensky

and Senter (1969) performed a similar study using recall accuracy as

the dependent variable. They also compared the performance of the

following three groups: a drill, or control group, which was given

practice learning serial lists; a lecture group which was provided a

lecture demonstration on the hook (pegword) method; and a

lecture-drill group which was provided a combination of the two

preceeding treatments. Although no significant difference was

obtained between the lecture and the lecture-drill groups, both of

these groups performed significantly better than the drill only

(control) group. These findings obtained both on an immediate

recall test and on a delayed test administered 24 hours later. This

experiment also contrasted performance when the pegwQrd was and was

not explicitly presented. In contrast to the Berla, Persenky, and

Senter (1969) study no significant differences were found between 4

these two conditions. As another study by Delprato and Baker (1974)

found no difference regarding the effectiveness of pegwords as a

function of whether or not the pegwords were explicitly presented,

it is likely that this factor is not important to mnemonic

effectivensss provided that the implicit pegwords are sufficiently

learned.

Up to this point the pegwords that have been employed have been

based on the number-consonant alphabet. For most experimental

purposes an easier pegword system to employ is the one-bun rhyme

mnemonic. The rhyme scheme makes the acquisition of the pegwords

much easier. In an experiment (Foth, 1973) which compared the

effectiveness of rhyme pegwords as retrieval cues versus the

effectiveness of pegwords based on the number-consonant alphabet,

the results were essentially equivalent.

Bugelski, Kidd, and Seginen (1968) reported an important

parametric investigation of the one-bun rhyme mnemotechnic. They

compared the performance of their mnemonic group against both a

standard noninstructed control group and a rhyme control group which

learned the one-bun rhyme, but was not instructed in imagery

elaboration. Presentation rates of two, four and eight seconds were

employed. No significant enhancement for the mnemonic group was

obtained at the two second rate. Significant enhancement was

obtained at the four second rate, however, and even greater

enhancement was obtained at the eight second rate. The performance

of the rhyme control was essentially equivalent to that of the

standard control.

Bugelski (1968) addressed the issue of interference when the

pegwords were used to learn successive lists of items. Bugelski had

27
rhyme pegword mnemonic and control subjects learn six successive

lists of ten items each, self-paced (T seconds/item : mnemonic =

8.11; control = 6.11). At the end of the experiment subjects were

to recall as many items as possible in their correct ordinal

position (e.g., all number one items, all number two items, etc.)

from all six lists. During the initial recall of each of the lists

the mnemonic subjects exhibited uniformly high recall, whereas

control subjects presented a pattern of recall in which performance

alternated high, low, high, low, etc. On the final recall of all

the lists, the average recall for the mnemonic group was 63% as

compared with 22% for the control group. Although the recall for

the mnemonic group was representative of all lists, recall for

control subjects tended to be greatest on the last two lists

learned.

Keppel and Zavortink (1969) partially replicated Bugelski's

(1966) findings. Although they did find an absence of proactive and

interference effects across four successive lists, both the mnemonic

and control groups exhibited pronounced retroactive effects during

the final recall of all four lists. Perhaps a significant

difference between the two studies is that Bugelski (1968) employed

a self paced procedure, whereas Keppel and Zavortink (1969) employed

a six second/item presentation rate.

Bower and Reitman (1972) compared two means of employing

pegwords in a multilist situation. One group (SI) was to form

separate images for eaeh pegword for each list. The other group

(PE) was to elaborate progressively their images for each pegword

across the lists. That is, as each new list was learned, items were

added to the composite image for each pegword. Thus at the end of

the five lists that were learned, the PE groups were to have one

composite image of five items and the pegword, whereas the SI group

was to have five separate images for each pegword. There were no

significant differences on the immediate recall of each list.

However, at the end of' session test and at the one-week delay test

the PE group was significantly superior to the SI group. On the one

week test, however, there was a tendency to recall better the items

from earlier lists, thus suggesting some effect of cumulative

rehearsal. Bower and Reitman employed a 10 seconu/item presentation

rate. The literature suggests, then, that proactive interference

does not present a problem with the pegword mnemotechnic, and that

there are at least two ways of mitigating or eliminating retroactive

effects, i.e., through self-pacing or progressive elaborations.

Apart from the use of explicit-presentation versus implicit

generation of pegwords, little attention has been given to what

constitutes an effective pegword. This question is important apart f'rom~ applied considerations, for it gets at the issue of what

constitutes an effective retrieval cue - an issue at the very heart

of memory theory. One aspect of this issue which has been

28

fromappied 

onsdertion, 

fr i get 

attheissu 

ofwha
addressed, but not answered, is that of the relative effectiveness

of concrete versus abstract pegwords. According to Paivio's (1969)

conceptual peg hypothesis, item concreteness is more potent on the

stimulus side than on the response side of paired-associates.

Standard paired-associate research, with the-stimulus terms

presented explicitly, has corroborated this hypothesis. Paivio

(1968) found, however, that recall did not vary as a function of

pegword (stimulus) concreteness when subjects were using a rhyme

pegword mnemotechnic. Subsequent investigators (Delprato & Baker,

1974; Wortman and Sparling, 1974) who have purported to address the

issue of pegword concreteness have clearly not addressed the issue

as both studies confounded pegword concreteness with response

concreteness. Thus far all studies have dealt exclusively with

numeric pegwords; pegwords based either on the number-consonant

alphabet or upon rhyme schemes. No studies have been found

regarding pegwords based on other systems, e.g., the alphabet.

Another question which has received scant attention regards the

characteristics of individuals that influence effective use of the

pegword ri emotechnic. Most of the reported studies have used

college students as subjects. At one extreme Higbee (1976)

demonstrated, to his own satisfaction at least, that two young girls

(age 7 yrs. 2 mos., 5 yrs. 3 mos.) were able to use the rhyme

pegword technique to learn the Ten Commandments. At another

extreme, however, Griffith and Actkinson (1978) found that, in the

army at least, only individuals with General Technical (GT) scores

110 and over were able to use the rhyme pegword techniques

effectively. Griffith and Actkinson did use an eight second

presentation rate. It may be that at a slower presentation rate

and/or with more practice time, low and moderate GT aptitude

individuals could use the mnemotechnic effectively.

29
Linking Mnemotechnic

Wood (196'1) compared a linking mnemotechnic against a

noninstructed control group on the learning of a list of forty words

presented aurally and found the recall of the linking group to be

superior. Delin (1969a) instructed experimental subjects to learn a

serial list of sixteen items by using bizarre images to link

successive items. Delin stressed, however, that each pair of images

was to be unique and that the successive images were not to be

linked together in a string. He found the recall of this

experimental group to be higher than the recall of a control group

given standard serial anticipation instructions. In another study

Delin (1969b) attempted to determine what components of the linking

nr-iotechnic were responsible for improved recall performance by

employing the following successive approximations to a linking

mnemotechnic: (a) to treat each item as paired with the previous

,. (b) to make a mental image of each item paired with the

pre'ious one; (c) to make a vivid mental image of each item paired

with the previous one; (d) to make a vivid active image of each item

paired with the previous one; (e) to do (d) using as many sensory

modalities as possible; and (f) to do all the preceding and to make

the images bizarre. Delin found that with the exception of (a)

simple pairing and (f) bizarreness, each successive approximation

significantly incremented recall. Another researcher, Pugelski

(1974), also found that instructions to use a linking mnemotechnic

resulted in serial recall superior to that of a standard control

group. Moreover, he obtained this result with both college students

and eighth graders.

Bower and Clark (1969) have reported a study demcnstrating the

effectiveness of a type of linking mnemotechnic, the story

technique. Subjects were required to learn 12 serial lists of 10

nouns each followed by a final recall of all the lists.

Experimental subjects were instructed to learn the lists according

to a narrative-chaining technique in which each noun was linked to

each succeeding noun in terms of a narrative story. Experimental

subjects were allowed as much time as they needed to learn each

list. Each control subject was yoked to an experimental subject in

terms of time allowed to learn each list. Although the immediate

recall was essentially equivalent for both groups, on the final

recall the experimental group outperformed the control group by a

factor close to four.

Murray (19 74) extended the findings of' Bower and Clark (1969) by

varying the interitem associative strength of list items (high, low,

and zero) and by assessing retention immediately after each list was

studied, at. the end of the session after the ten word lists had been

learned, and at retention intervals 7, 14, and 28 days after list

learning. Murray confirmed Bower and Clark (1969) by finding no

significant differences between the experimental and control groups,

30
alrd in iruing a signi ficant di if'ereitce in favor of' the experit.ental

group Ouring tile recall test administered at the end of' the sessiol.

,oreover, Murray found recall at the enu of' session test and at the

seven day retentio interval to be higher for the experimental

condition rcgiardless of tihe iriteritei association strenGth. 'Th'e

retention itflererice between the experimental arnd coiitrol conditions

did riot tiaintain for the 14 and 2b day intervals, however.

herrmanr, Geisler, arid Atkinson (1973) explored the effectiverie:;

of a narrative story mnemonic by havin6 subjects alternate telline

aid listenin to stories lnking the 8 niouns ior each of' the lists.

They dia niot employ a control group in their study. They found the

narrative-story rriemonic had te apparent effect of elevating recall

for items in the middle of' te lists, resultingt in flat recall

f'unctions and thus the elimination of' thle typical serial posit ion

effect (i.e, the elevated recall of the ends of lists).

Although the preponderance of' studies clearly indicate mnerionic

enhancemeent as a result of eiployin6 a linkin , irnemotechnic, two

experiments by damst and Freund (1976) revealed negative results.

Garist and Freund had subjects learn one list of thirty words under

one of the following sets of instructions; (1) to recall the list

however they wished; k2) to generate a story linkinm, tile list items

(i.e., a linkinl, mnemotechnic) arid during recall, to write the

stories they had devised arid then to cireule list iteris; or (3) to

generate a story linkini, the list items (i.e., the linking

irinerotechnic again) and, during recall, f'irst to write all the list

iteii) they could remember and then to write the story they had

devised, circuling the list items. Half the subjects under each

condition learned a list with high imagery items, whereas tire

remaining subjects learned a low imagery list. All subjects were

given five iinutes to study their respective lists. Although, there

was a main effect of item imagery (high>low), there was io

sitgrrit'icait elect of' instructional set nor was there a sijgnificant

instruCtI orlil set by item imagery interactiou. The second

experirlierit corpared a l'ree recall condition, with a story , enieration

(Ii ki Iri mnerlotechnic) condition, with a third ,,roup whose subjects

were i ven one of the linking stories from a set of liiking stories

which iau been generated by other subjects. A second variable was

stuUy time; subjects were given 1, 3, or 5 minutes for study.

Abain altronghr there was the expected signif'icant, ma in effect of

study time, there was neither a significant main effect of' the type

of study conrdit ion, nor was there a sitn i fi cant iit eraction effect

Gfamst arid Freund listed some methodological differences among

studies to accounit for why their fitioirigs were di screpanit Iron: ot her

researchers. One reason offered was that the Gai;st and Freind study

employed a singe lit of thirty word-,. "lost previous studies

eployed d sutc.ess Ve serie.; of' shorter lists. A'C'ordinetly Ganat

and I'reurid hypt,tht: i ed a practice effect in somr~e of the other

j tul di es. That i*;, subjects mig ht have becorme more pro'icierit in the
technique across lists. Gamst and Freund employed no practice list

in their experiments. They also presented the whole list to the

subjects, rather than presenting the items sequentially.

Number-Consonant Alphabet

Although the number-consonant alphabet is central to any

auvanced system of mnemotechnics, no studies were found in the

literature regarding the number-consonant alphabet per se. Issues

regarding how long it takes to become proficient with the

number-consonant alphabet, and to what extent the use of the

number-consonant alphabet enhances the retention of digital

information have simply not been addressed. Apparently trained

mnemonists can use the number-consonant alphabet in a most

impressive manner. However, to the best of this writer's knowledge,

there have been no systematic analyses regarding how effectively

innetrionists do use the number-consonant alphabet. There has been

anecdotal evidence reported. The famous mnemonist Roth is said to

have learned the hundreds of names and phone numbers of the members

of the San Francisco Rotary Club (Hoffman & Senter, 1978). bower

(1973) writes about a 96 year old man who would memorize lists of 50

three-digit numbers shouted out to him by an audience at the rate of

one three digit number every five or ten seconds.

Data which do address the central feature of the

number-consonant alphabet, i.e., recoding, were reported in George

Miller's classic article, "The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus

Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity For Processing Information" (1956).

He reported a study by Sidney Smith in which Smith demonstrated that

the memory span for binary digits could be greatly enhanced by

recoding the binary digits into higher order chunks of octal digits.

After Smith had practiced extensively on the system itself he was

able to recall a sequence of forty binary digits read to him once.

Slak (1970) did a series of experiments in which he used a

letter-number system of his own invention. Slak's system was

designed specifically for the learning of three digit numbers. In

his system the first and third letters were represented by

consonants and the middle digit was represented by a vowel.

Approximately twenty hours were required to learn this system. The

system was reported to be useful for a memory-span task, and serial

learning task, and a free recall task. Because of the amount of

time required to learn the system, the subject pool was restricted

to Slack himself and one assistant. He taught a simplified version

of his system to twenty undergraduates who used it to learn the

numbers about twice as fast as a control group that had not been

taught the system.

Chase and Ericsson (Note 4) have recently reported an extensive

study of a single individual who is attempting to increase his digit

32
rA

span. After seven months of training this individual increased his

digit span from seven to forty-two. The mnemotechnical coding

strategy this individual has developed is quite interesting. Taking

advantage of his own interest in competitive running, he recodes

digit sequences in terms of what constitutes good, poor, and average

times for different distances.

Mnemotechnics for Spelling

No research was found bearing upon the utility of mnemotechnics

for spelling. This absence of research on mnemotechnics and

spelling is remarkable as spelling difficulties in English are

noteworthy, even among the highly educated. Within the realm of

Army training, a spelling subtest is one of the criteria against

which the Basic Skills Education Program (BSEP) is assessed. It

would be interesting to determine whether BSEP participants given

mnemotechnical training in spelling would perform appreciably

different on the spelling subtest than BSEP participants given no

ninemotechnical training.

M4nemotechnics for Speeches

In spite of their historical precedence, no research was found,

in the psychological literature at least, bearing upon the

effectiveness of mnemotechnics for speeches. One interesting

comparison would concern which of the following mnemotechnics is

more effective: loci, pegwords or linking. In an instructional

situation it would be interesting to compare the respective

performances of instructors using one of the three following

methods: reading a lecture verbatim; delivering the lecture from

notes; and delivering the lecture with a mnemontechnic. These same

comparisons would also be interesting in comparing formal speeches.

Substitute Word or Keyword Technique

The rqader will remember that the distinction betwt-en the

substitute word or keyword technique is that the substitute word is

based on the entire word or phrase to-be-learned, whereas a keyword

is usually based on only a fragment (e.g, syllable) of the

to-be-learned material. The substitute word or keyword is then

related to the meaning of the to-be-learrieo material by forming an

interactive image involving the substitute word (keyword) and a

visual representation of its meaning. All published research has

dealt with the keyword technique to the exclusion of the substitute

word technique. Apparently the substitute word technique was

discarded as a result of pilot research which indicated that

keywords were either more effective or practical (Raugh & Actkinson,

1974).

The first published experiment on the effectiveness of the

33

I AM
keyword technique is by Ott, Butler, Blake, and Ball (1973). They

studied the acquisition of the English translations of 24 one

syllable German nouns and adjectives. Four treatment groups were

employed: Treatment 1, in which the keyword was presented as an

interactive picture relating the keyword and the to-be-learned word

meaning (e.g., a picture of an eye peering out of an egg as a

mnemonic for the German word, Ei, meaning egg); Treatment 2, in

which subjects only saw the English interpretation of the German

word that was being pronounced on the tape (These subjects were

instructed to select an English word which sounded similar to the

German word they were hearing and to generate an interactive image

associating the English sound-alike word and the meaning); Treatment

3, in which subjects learned the English translation of the German

words according to their own strategies; and Treatment 4, in which

subjects were to learn the meanings of the German words according to

rote repetition. Words were presented to all subjects at a 12

second rate. Subjects were given a retention test eight minutes

after they learned the list (the interval was filled with an

interpolated task); they were subsequently tested two weeks later.

Statistical analyses indicated that Treatments 1 and 2 were

significantly superior to Treatments 3 and 4 which were

indistinguishable from one another on all three tests. Although

Treatment 1 was significantly higher than Treatment 2 during the

learning test and the retention test, this difference disappeared in

the delayed retention test.

Haugh and Atkinson (1974, 1975) conducted four experiments

regarding the effectiveness of the keyword mnemotechnic for the

acquisition of the meanings of Spanish vocabulary words. In their

first experiment all subjects were taught the keyword for each word

of a 60-word Spanish vocabulary. After learning the keywords, the

experimental group was trained to use mental imagery to associate

each keyword to its corresponding English translation, whereas the

control group was trained to use a rote rehearsal method to

associate each Spanish word directly to its English translation.

The final test score for the experimental group was 88% correct

versus 28% correct in the control group. In their second experiment

the keywords were not prelearned. Rather, the subjects in the

experimental group learned the keywords simultaneously with their

formation of imagery links, whereas the control subjects used rote

rehearsal to make direct associations between the Spanish words and

their English translations. Here the final test score was 59%

correct for experimental subjects and 30% correct for control

subjects. Subsequent experiments were run under computer control.

Keywords were presented on the computer's CRT while the Spanish word

was heard from audio tape. Subjects used the keyboard to type their

responses. The third experiment employed a within subjects design.

Under the control condition subjects were told to use any learning

strategy except the keyword strategy. Again a significant

difference was obtained with final test scores averaging 54% under

34
.I

the keyword condition versus 45% for the control condition. The

fourth experiment added a free-choice condition, under which the

subject could request a keyword if desired, to the strict keyword

condition, in which a keyword was always supplied, and an

anything-but-keyword control condition. The final test scores

averaged 59%, 57%, and 50% correct for the free-choice, strict

keyword, and anything-but-keyword control conditions, respectively.

Whereas the free-choice and strict keyword were not significantly

different, both of these conditions were significantly better than

the anything-but-keyword control condition. Under the free-choice

condition, subjects requested a keyword at least once for 92% of the

items. Moreover, the frequency of keyword requests increased with

the scaled difficulty of the items.

Atkinson and Raugh (1975) expanded the generality of their

conclusions in an experiment involving Russian vocabulary

acquisition. Subjects were to learn the meanings of 120 words

presented over three days. One group was instructed in the keywora

mnemotechnic. They were told to learn the keyword first and then to

picture an imagery interaction between the keyword and the English

translations; they were also told that if no such image came to

mind, they could generate a phrase or sentence incorporating the

keyword and translation. Control subjects were not given

instructions on the use of keywords or mental imagery, but were

simply told to learn the meanings in whatever manner they wished.

The average percentage correct on a comprehension test was 72% for

the keyword group and 46% for the control group. On a delayed

comprehension test (range 30 to 60 days later, 7 = 43 days), the

keyword group recalled 43% whereas the control group recalled 28%.

All the preceding studies were psychology experiments. That is,

subjects were not language students struggling with the acquisition

of their respective vocabularies. Haugh, Schupbach, and Atkinson

(1977) have reported a study involving second year Russian students.

These students studied a large (675 words) basic vocabulary over an

8 to 10 week period. Unfortunately, no control group was enployed

in this study and only thirteen subjects were involved overall.

Most subjects did find keywords useful, however, and tended to use

them when they saw no roots or cognates they could employ.

Willerman (1977) examined the utility of the keyword

mnemotechnic for first year college French students. Moreover, she

examined French vocabulary production as well as English translation

as dependent variables. Willerman found no facilitating effect for

the keyword mnemotechnic under any conditions. In fact, some

students were hostile to the keyword nemotechnic. A close

examination of her instructions and procedure, suggests that the

instructions and procedures are likely reasons why she did not

obtain effects. Her instructions were minimal and very little was

provided in the way of training and feedback to assure that the

35
students understood the technique.

Morse Code Mnemotechnics

Ainsworth (1979) reported on the effectiveness of the pictorial

mnemonics developed for the learning of Morse Code by the Naval

Training Analysis and Evaluation Group (TAEG). During the

acquisition phase mnemonics resulted in superior performance when

compared to a traditionally trained group with respect to both

sending and receiving skills. The mnemonics enhanced sending skills

more than receiving skills. These tests administered during

acquisition were paper and pencil tests. At the end of the fourth

and fifth weeks of training subjects were tested during a

performance phase on their skill in receiving flashing light

messages. The type of instruction employed did not have

significant differential effects during this performance phase.

No published reports were found bearing on the effectiveness of

other mnemotechnics in Morse Code learning.

Mnemotechnics for Remembering Names and Faces

Although the issue of facial recognition has received some

attention (e.g., Winograd, 1978, Bower and Karlin, 1974), no

research has examined the utility of recoding names into concrete

representations and then forming an interacting image between a

salient facial feature and the concrete representation of the name.

Again, as with other mnemotechnics, there is anecdotal evidence

regarding its effectiveness. For instance, the mnemonist, Harry

Lorayne, before appearing on the Jack Paar television show

associated the names of each person in the studio audience,

numbering around 400, to their respective face. During the show he

recalled each name as the person stood up in the audience. Lorayne,

however, has devoted his life to the performance of feats of memory.

The general utility of this mnemotechnic remains an open question.

When one considers the common lament about memory, "I can never

remember a name, but I always remember a face," the dearth of

experiments concerning the association of name to face is most

remarkable. In fact, only one published experiment was found

regarding the problem of associating names to faces. That study by

Landauer and Bjork (1978) examined the effectiveness of different

practice schedules for associating names to faces. They found that

by expanding the time between successive tests, name recall was

significantly enhanced.

Mnerriotechnics for Pictorial Symbol Referents

Griffith and ACLkinson (197o) reported on the effectiveness of

mnemonic cues for the learning of the meanings of international road

36
signs. Although they found no significant evidence for mnemonic

enhancement, they argued that the conditions were far from optimal.

They suggested that with further refinements mnemonic cues might

prove useful.

Higbee (1977) reported a masters thesis (Chuang, 1974) and a

doctoral dissertation (Bennion, 1974) bearing upon the utility of a

mnemotechnic for learning the English translations for Chinese

ideographs. In the Chuang study high school and college students

learned twelve Chinese-English word pairs. Half of the students

were told to learn the pairs by means of rote rehearsal, whereas the

remaining students were instructed to form a mental image which

would help them remember the English meaning of the Chinese

ideograph. Retention was tested by means of both recall and

recognition. Although the differences were consistently in favor of

the students employing the mnemotechnic, a statistically significant

difference was only obtained for high school students under

recognition testing. The experiment by Bennion involved the same

twelve word pairs, but the subjects were all high school students.

Bennion compared the mnemotechnic against a control condition in

which the students were to note the geometrical features of the

Chinese characters. The same pattern of results was obtained in the

Bennion study as in the Chuang study. Again, only the recognition

test was statistically significant.

The above studies exhaust the available research on the utility

of mnemotechnics for learning the referents of pictorial symbols.

Clearly a great deal more research needs to be done.

Mnemotechnics for Remembering Times and Places

No reports were found in the literature bearing upon the issue

of the effectiveness of specific mnemotechnics for remembering times

and places.

37
Mnemotechnics for Recognition

No research reports were found in the literature regarding the

effectiveness of mental marking per se on recognition memory.

However, an experiment by Griffith (1975) does suggest that imaginal

elaboration can enhance recognition memory. In an incidental

learning task, subjects were to rate individual words presented

aurally in terms of their imageability. Subjects performing this

imagery incidental task were superior on a subsequent recognition

test to subjects who categorized these same words, and to subjects

who were intentionally set for the recognition test. As mental

marking typically involves imaginal elaboration it is reasonable to

expect that explicit instructions to mark mentally to-be-recognized

infortnation would result in similar enhancement. Obviously, a good

deal more research must be done, however.

Mnemotechnics for Remembering Colors

An experiment by Siegel and Siegel (1976) assessed the utility

of the mnemotechnic using the hue diamond with numerical

interpolation. Subjects trained for ten minutes on this color

coding mnemotechnic performed more accurately and more consistently

in a task requiring the matching of hues from memory than a control

group not instructed in the mnemotechnic.

Relative Effectiveness of Mnemotechnics for List Learning

The linking, loci, and pegword mnemotechnics can all be used for

learning lists of items. A central question is whether any one

mnemotechnic is better than the others. Pegword mnemotechnics do

have an advantage in that they not only allow the strict serial

learning of a list, but they also provide for the rapid recall of

list items by their precise serial position. That is, if someone

had employed either the method of loci or a linking mnemotechnic and

was asked to recall the fifth item on the list, he would likely have

to run through the list to retrieve the fifth item. If that person

had used a pegword mnemotechnic, however, he would simply recall the

pegword for five, and retrieve the appropriate item.

Suppose the task is that of free recall or serial recall and

that rapid recall of list position is not important. Under these

conditions is it desirable to use a pegword technique? Three

experiments suggest a negative answer to this question. With

respect to free recall, Wood (1967) found a linking mnemotechnic

superior to a pegword mnemotechnic for the learning of a list of

forty words. Similarly, Santa, Fuskin, and Yio (1973) found a story

technique (linking) to be superior to a pegword technique with

respect to the final recall of six lists of ten words each. With

respect to serial learning, Borges, Arnold, and McClure (1976) found

a story mnemotechnic superior to a pegword mnemotechnic for the

38
delayed recall of four lists of ten items each. It would appear,

then, that unless it is desirable to recall rapidly by list

position, that a linking story mnemotechnic should be preferred for

list learning.

Principles of Effective Mnemotechnic Implementation

All mnemotechnics invoLve the generation of mediators. These

mediators usually take thE form of visual images. The discovery,

then, of principles of good mediator generation has direct relevance

for the effective implementation of all mnemotechnics. With regard

to the problem of mediator effectiveness, the following issues have

been investigated.

Item Attributes (Imagery Value, Concreteness, and

Meaningfulness) Norms are available (e.g., Paivio, Yuille, and

Madigan, 1968) which rate individual words in terms 6f their imagery

value (how easy it is to form a mental image for a referent of the

word), concreteness (how directly the word refers to something

tangible as opposed to something abstract), and meaningfulness (the

number of associations that can be generated to a word within a

prescribed time period). One of the most robust and significant

findings to come out of all the literature on verbal learning and

memory is that these attributes correlate very highly with learning

and retention. Paivio (1969,1971) has argued and provided empirical

support for the position that of these three attributes, imagery

value is the most important. It is much easier to employ

mnemotechnics when the to-be-remembered material is readily imaged.

Indeed, most mnemotechnics provide for the recoding of abstract

information into an imageable representation. Generally speaking,

the less recoding that is involved, the more effective is the

implementation of the mnemotechnic.

Bizarreness, Interaction, and Emotionality of Mediators une of

the most fundamental precepts of the ancient mnemonists

(Yates, 1966) was to make images as bizarre (implausible,

incongruous, or ludicrous) as possible. Presumably, bizarre images

were regarded as more memorable. This same principle is advocated

by modern mnemonists (Furst, 1957; Lorayne, 1957). Some

experimental work, however, has tended not to support this

principle. Research by Wood (1967), Perensky and Senter (1970),

Nappe and Wollen (1973), and Senter and Hoffman (1976) found not

only that bizarre imagery was no more effective than common images,

but also that subjects required more time to form bizarre than

common images. Hauck, Walsh, and Kroll (1976) essentially

replicated the Nappe and Wollen experiment with more experienced

subjects. Although subjects improved their speed of image

generation across five days of experimentation, it still took longer

to generate bizarre as compared to common images. Again no

difference in recall perlorrmence was obtained.

39
Wollen, Weber, and Lowry (1972) argued that the dimensions of

bizarreness and interaction were probably confounded in the typical

experiment. Accordingly, they attempted to separate the dimensions

by providing pictures for each of the word pairs. Each word pair

had the four following pictorial representations: interacting,

nonbizarre; interacting, bizarre; noninteracting, nonbizarre; and

noninteracting, bizarre. Within this paradigm they discovered that

it was the interaction rather than the bizarreness dimension that

had a facilitating effect on recall. Subsequently, these results

were replicated by Senter and Hoffman (1976).

Sadalla and Loftness (1971) examined the question of the effect

of emotionality on images. They had subjects construct images of

positive, negative, or neutral emotional content for use as mnemonic

aids in a paired-associate task; They found that the emotional

mediators were more effective than neutral mediators, but that it

did not make any difference whether the mediators were positive or

negative in content.

Both the issues of bizarreness and emotionality were re-examined

by Andreoff and Yarmey (1976). They argued that bizarreness might

enhance long term retention and, accordingly, employed a delayed

test 24 hours after an immediate test. They found a significant

effect of bizarreness on both the immediate and the delayed test.

That is, bizarre imagery instructions were more effective than

common imagery instructions. The main effect of emotional

instructions was not significant. In fact, on the delayed test

instructions to form emotional images tended to suppress the effect

of bizarreness.

Although the preponderance of data indicates that bizarreness

does not impact on immediate recall, delayed recall appears to be

another matter. In addition to the Andreoff and Yarmey (1976)

experiment cited above, Webber and Marshall (1978) also found that

bizarre imagery facilitated delayed recall. An earlier study by

Delin (1968) found that recall fifteen weeks after initial learning

was positively correlated with the rated bizarreness of the mnemonic

image. The only experiment which employed a delayed recall test and

still failed to find a recall-enhancing effect of bizarreness is

that by Hauck et al. (1976).

Supplied vs. Generated Mediators Using what is essentially a

paired-associate paradigm, Bobrow and Bower (1969), Pelton (1969),

Bower & Winzenz (1974), Schwartz (1971), and Griffith (1976) have

found that when individuals form their own mediators recall is

higher than when mediators are supplied by the experimenter.

Schwartz and Walsh (1974) failed to find a difference in recall

between experimenter supplied and subject generated mediators.

Their experiment was especially contrived, however, for the

mediators in the experimenter-supplied condition were identical to

40
those in the subject-generated condition. It is possible that their

findings are restricted to their limited situation. Blick and his

collegues have found either no difference between

experimenter-supplied or subject-generated mediators (Buonassissi,

Blick, and Kibler, 1972) or a significant difference in favor of

experimenter-supplied mediators (Gartman and Blick, 1974; Kibler and

Blick, 1971; Pines and Blick, 1974). Blick and his colleagues have

employed the free recall of either individual words or of word pairs V as the criterial task. In short, the empirical data do not provide

clear support for either supplied or generated mediators. It may

very well be that there is a complex interaction between mediator

type, task type and individual differences.

All the above prcsupposes that subjects are motivated to form

mediators. The work of Griffith (1976) suggests that mediator

formation requires mental effort. Accordingly, if an individual is

not sufficiently motivated to form his own mediators, and the

mediators are not supplied, instructions in the use of a

mnemotechnic will be to no avail. Even if the individual is

sufficiently motivated to generate his own mediators, if he lacks

the facility to form mediators quickly, he may not be able to employ

effectively a mnemotechnic for a given task. In the typical

training situation, then, practical constraints might dictate that

mediators be supplied to the trainers. To this end the Navy

Training Analysis and Evaluation Group (TAEG) has published a guide

for technical writers to use in incorporating mnemonics into

training material (Braby, Kincaid, and Aagard, 1978). In another

report (Ainsworth, 1979), the acquisition of Morse Code was

significantly enhanced by supplying graphic mediators to signalmen

trainers.

Rehearsal Although advertisements for commercial memory courses

directly imply that mnemotechnics instantly "burn" information

permanently into memory, the ancient Greeks and Romans (Yates, 1966)

realized that the images generated by mnemotechnics needed to be

rehearsed if the required information was to be retained. The

empirical qtestion concerns how often the material needs to be

rehearsed and at what inte-vals. Lorayne and Lucas (1974) recommend

that the material be rehearsed at one, three, and seven days

following original learning if the individual desires to retain the

information permanently. Senter (Note 5) recommends rehearsal a few

hours after original learning, then once the following day, and once

again several days later. Although no empirical research on the

question of the effects of the spacing of practice and mnemotechnics

is available, a general finding throughout the verbal learning and

memory literature is that distributed practice is superior to massed

practice (Melton, 1970). For example, Landauer and Ross (1977)

found that simple instructions to emr.loy spaced practice in trying

to remember a telephone number resulted in retention superior to

that of individuals given no instructions rearding practice.

41
Further work (Landauer and Bjork, 1976) has indicated that

increasing the time between successive repetitions results in

retention superior to that associated with either uniform or

contracting repetitions.

Although general prescriptions to rehearse, to space the

rehearsals, and to increase the time between successive rehearsals

are useful, it is clear that a good deal of empirical work needs to

be done. Parametric investigations need to be undertaken in which

different memotechnics and different classes of materials are

studied. Until precise parametric work is completed, valid I'

prescriptions for using mnemotechnics to optimal effect cannot be

given.

Additional Considerations

Keeping Memories Current Generally speaking, mnemotechnics have

been designed for long term retention. However, many memory tasks

require that information be constantly updated. Different jobs that

require updating of information range from that of the short-order

cook to that of the intelligence anaylst. Pilots of aircraft as

well as individuals in command positions cannot avoid the burdensome

task of updating their memories. Even though new technologies,

i.e., computer systems, provide a means of lessening this burden on

memory, modifications of computer hardware or software, themselves,

require the updating of skills and procedures.

Research does seem to indicate that Vinemotcqhnics have potential

utility for updating memories. Mnemotechnics seem to be resistant

to practice and interference effects (Bower and Reitman, 1971;

Bugelski, 1968; and Keppel and Zavortink, 1969), and that

retroactive effects can at least be mitigated, if not eliminated

(Bower and Reitman, 1971; Bugelski, 1968). In a keeping track task

in which subjects must keep track of the current values of a number

of variables it has been found that subjects tend to develop their

own mnemotechnic in which the subjects mentally picture a set of

windows or bins corresponding to each variable. Individual

"tallies" are then kept in each window and rehearsed (Monty, 1968).

Recently Bjork (1978) has evaluated some specific strategies

with respect to the updating of memory. The first strategy he

evaluated was a visual-erasure strategy. This visual-erasure

strategy was reported by a mnemonist for whom proactive inhibition

was e3sentially nonexistent (see Hunt and Love, 1971). This

visual-erasure strategy consists of imagining several little

blackboards, each with the name of a stimulus above it. Whenever

information needs to be updated the old information is mentally

erased and the new information is mentally written in its place. An

experiment (reported in Bjork, 1978) employed four stimulus words

(BOAT, ROPE, HILL, FROG) printed on 5 by 7 cards mounted in a

42
horizontal array on a wall directly in front of a subject. Response

to these stimulus cards had to be constantly updated. The visual

erasure strategy proved unworkable for the typical subject. Typical

subjects simply did not have the facility to do the mental writing

and erasing. Consequently, Bjork and his colleague, McClure,

developed several alternatives to the visual erasure strategy. One

alternative was the ordered-rehearsal strategy. According to this

strategy, the four current response words were to be rehearsed in a

fixed, rote order corresponding to the order of the stimulus words

on the wall. A second alternative strategy evaluated was a story

construction strategy. Using essentially what was a linking story

mnemotechnic, subjects were to construct a continuing narrative

based on each stimulus word. A third alternative strategy evaluated

was an image-replacement strategy. Here subjects were to form an

image for each stimulus response connection. Wherever information

was updated they were simply to replace the image. These strategies 4. were evaluated with respect to recall after the initial updating and

on the final total recall of all items at the end of'the task.

Overall, the story mnemotechnic proved to be the best. Not only was

recall as good as ordered rehearsal for initial updating (around 80%

correct) but recall was also highest on the final total recall

(around 67%). Whereas the ordered rehearsal was superior to image

replacement for initial updating (-'77% to---67%), image replacement

proved superior on the final total recall (- 45% to- 22%).

Clearly, innemotechnics are potentially useful for updating

memories. However, it is also clear that more research,

particularly with real world tasks, needs to be done.

Iransfer to New Situations A critical issue for mnemotechnics

and other learning strategies is whether training in one situation

will transfer to another situation. Moreover, it is desirable to

know the extent of generalization from one situation with another.

For mnemotechnics, or other learning strategies, to have any real

general utility, they must be reaaily generalizable. Given the

criticality of these issues of transfer and generalization, it is

most remarkable that so little has been done in the way of empirical

examination of these issues. What little research that has been

done has mainly employed either children or the educable mentally

retarded as subjects (see Weinstein, 1975, 1978 for a review).

Moreover, the training programs have not provided extensive

training. Although one or two examples might illustrate how to

employ a mnemotechnic or learning strategy, it is likely that a fair

amount of practice is required before any real facility is

developed. To be able to generalize to new situations might require

even more training.

Although no research was found regarding the issue of the

transfer of mnemotechnics per se, an experiment by Weinstein (1975;

1978) did examine the related issue of the transfer of elaboration

skills training. Weinstein used ninth grade high school students in

43
one of the three following groups: experimental, control, and

posttest only. The experimental group received five 45 minute

training sessions administered about one week apart. Over the

course of their training sessions the experimental subjects were to

generate mediators for nineteen different tasks. Examples of the

tasks included having subjects read a passage on how arteries differ

from veins, and then to generate elaboraters to-e phasize the

distinctions, e.g., veins are thinner than arteries, so a thin

hollow tube can be used as an image for a vein; having subjects

provide mental elaborations for the frequent meanings prefixes such

as inter, mis, sub (e.g. thinking of a submarine going under the

water); having subjects memorize a home economics shopping list by

using what is a story mnemotechnic. While the experimental subjects

were performing their tasks, instructors were available to provide

feedback on the subjects' elaborations and to provide suggestions as

to how the subjects might improve their technique. Control subjects

also attended five training sessions and were exposed to the same

tasks. However, the control subjects were given no clues as to how

best they could perform the tasks. The postest only group provides

another control baseline by attending only the two postesting

sessions.

The postests were administered to all groups four weeks apart

(during the sixth and tenth weeks of the experiment). Each postest

consisted of the following criterion tests: a reading test, a free

recall test, two trials of a paired-associate learning test, and two

trials of a serial learning test. Although the experimental group

consistently outperformed the control group and the postest only

group on all criterion tests on both the immediate and the delayed

posttest, the magnitude of the differences were such that

statistically significant differences were obtained on only the

following criterion postest: free recall and trial 2 of paired

associates learning on the immediate postest, and reading and trial

one of the serial lea-ning delayed posttest. Although these results

suggest that elaboration training does generalize, they also

underscore the problem of developing adequate training programs so

that cognitive skills do readily generalize to new training

situations.

Effects on Other Cognitive Activities. Mnemonics and

rnnemotechnics have achieved eminent success with respect to the

enhancement of memory. A question of both practical and theoretical

import is whether mnemonics or innemotechnics will have a negative,

positive, or a neutral impact on other cognitive skills. It might

be argued that individuals might become so preoccupied with the

mnemonics and mnemotechnics that other cognitive skills might

suffer. On the other hand, the enhancement of memory might reduce

memory demands such that other aspects of cognitive performance are

benefited. There is correlational evidence, at least, that Chess

experts and Go (an oriental game of comparable complexity to Chess)

44
experts evidence phenomenal memories for their respective games

(Chase and Simon, 1973a, 1973b; Reitman, 1976). In an academic

situation, Carlson, Kincaid, Lance, and Hodgson (1976) have found a

significant positive correlation between the reported use of

spontaneous mnemonics and college grade point average. Of course,

it is still possible that the effects of mnemonics and mnemotechnics

are specific to memory performance and that they have negligible

impact on other aspects of cognitive performance.

With respect to concept learning it is reasonable to assume that

a learner should be able to solve a concept more efficiently when

not required to maintain instance or hypothesis information in

memory. Research (Bruner, Goodnow, and Austin, 1956, p.92) has

found that external memory aids do enhance concept learning

performance. Research has also indicated that internal memory aids

can enhance concept learning. McVaugh (1973) has found that simple

verbal rehearsal can facilitate concept identification. Katz and

Paivio (1975) have found that manipulations of the imagery construct

can also facilitate concept attainment. With respect to the effect

of a specific mnemotechnic on concept attainment, only one

experiment was found in the literature. Dyer and Meyer (1976)

examined the effect of the one-bun pegword mnemotechnic on concept

attainment. They varied mnemonic instructions (pegword technique

vs. no instruction) and the memory requirement of the concept task

(successive vs. concurrent presentation) in a factorial design. An

interaction was obtained such that the pegword mnemotechnic did

enhance concept identification, but only under the condition with

high memory demands (i.e., concurrent presentation).

This rarely cited experiment by Dyer and Meyer (1976) is highly

significant, because it demonstrates that a mnemotechnic can have a

benefical effect on another cognitive task. These findings also

lead to another important question. And that is, what are the

advantages of having ready access to information, "in the head,"

versus having external sources providing the information?

45

. .. . ,,, .. ,. , ' L j -

-m o
Summary and Conclusions

Although the experimental research on mnemotechnics appears

quite promising, the gaps in the research surface are most

conspicuous. Many mnemotechnics have not even received experimental

scrutiny. Given the importance of the number-consonant alphabet,

this absence of experimentation is most regrettable. Even when

there is research bearing upon a particular mnemotechnic, the range

of research is limited. Very often the subject sample is restricted

to college students, the amount of training is quite limited, and

the retention intervals tested are limited. Within the context of

mnemotechnics, the issues of the optimum amount and distribution of

practice are typically ignored. Perhaps the most critical research

issue that has been largely ignored is that of the question of the

transfer and generalization of mnemotechnical skills. With the

exception of the limited research done with children and retarded

individuals, the research by Weinstein (1975,1978) constitutes the

only empirical attack on the problem Obviously, if mnemotechnics

do not readily transfer to new situations, they are of limited

utility. Finally more research needs to be done in real training

situations rather than in contrived laboratory settings.

46
A Research Strategy for Applying Mnemonics and Mneotechnics

to Military Training

Even given the tremendous shortcomings in research on mnemonics

and mnemotechnics, the preceding review has indicated that there are

a large number of mnemotechnics suitable for a wide range of memory

problems. Experimental evidence has indicated enough potential in a

laboratory environment to merit testing in realistic training

situations. Indeed, a basic criticism is that mnemotechnics have

typically not been evaluated in realistic situations. Moreover,

with the exception of Weinstein's (1975, 1978) research, little has

been done in the way of the assessment of the transfer and

generalization of mnemotechnical training to new situations. What

follows are some suggested lines of research and implementation, as

well as some considerations paramount to mnemonics and

mnemotechnics. It should be remembered that mnemonics and

mnemotechnics date back to the ancient Greeks (Yates, 1966). The

first military sponsored research on mnemonics dates back to 1957

(Note 1). In 1965, another favorable report ensued (Senter, 1965).

Recently, both the Army (Griffith and Actkinson, 1978) and the Navy

(Ainsworth, 1979; Braby, Kincaid, and Aagard, 1978) have reported

some very promising work. If further research is not pursued

intelligently, however, and if implementation is left to work itself

out, it is extremely likely that the potential training value of

mnemonics and mnemotechnics will be lost.

Direct Incorporation of Mnemonics into Training Materials

The Interservice Procedures for Instructional Systems

Development (1977) calls for the use of mnemonics in curriculum

development. To this end the Navy's Training Analysis and

Evaluation Group (TAEG) has developed a guidebook for technical

writers to assist them in incorporating mnemonics into training

materials (Braby, Kincaid, and Aagard, 1978). This guidebook is an

excellent source for technical writers. First, it provides guidance

on when, and when not, to employ mnemonics. Then it outlines nine

ways of incorporating mnemonics into training materials. For each

of these nine techniques an explicit example of how that technique

can be applied to Navy training is provided. Exercises are also

proviued so that technical writers can practice each technique.

This Navy TAEG guidebook is an excellent product, and the other

services might want to consider developin, their own versions of the

guidebook. Even given the excellence of this product, however, if

dedicated training is not provided to technical writers, and if

proper quality control is not maintained to assure that mnemonics

are being employeu appropriately, it is likely that the full

training potential of mnemonics will not be realized.

It should also be recognized that the direct incorporation of

mnemonics into training materials constitutes but one means of

ji
applying mnemonics and mnemotechnics to training. It requires the

development of mnemonics by technical and course writers. Students

are not required to develop their own mnemonics. At this time, it

is not even clear whether the direct incorporation of mnemonics into

training materials constitutes the best approach. Although, the

Interservice Procedures for Instructional Systems Development (1975)

should be followed and mnemonics incorporated wherever appropriate

in training materials, other approaches also need to be pursued.

Effective Mnemonics in System Design

A related concern regards the use of mnemonics in complex

systems. It would appear that in certain computer systems the use

of the term mnemonic (i.e., something which aids memory) is a

misnomer. For example, the Tactical Fire Direction System (TACFIRE)

command and control system for the field artillery employs 905

different mnemonics in its formats. Moreover, there are 177

additional legal entry mnemonics which operators must recall to

enter in the various fields of the formats. Although not all

operators need to recall all formats, the memory demands are

staggering. Quite frequently during the course of operations

operators must thumb through manuals looking for needed mnemonics.

There is an additional problem of redundant mnemonics. For

instance, there are seven different mnemonics denoting fuses.

Whether such redundancy is convenient from the point of view of

software design is not the point. The human factors implications

and the concomitant training problems are obvious, however. It is

ironic that mnemotechnics and higher order mnemonics should be

required for mnemonics which are supposed to aid memory.

Unfortunately there exist neither guidelines for developing system

mnemonics, nor military standards concerned with human factors

aspects of computer software. That experimental work designed to

enhance system mnemonics pays off is evidenced by the TOS2 system

(Nystrom and Gividen, 1978). By designing system mnemonics

carefully, training problems can be reduced significantly. Similarly

by incorporating highly imageable material in training materials,

training effectiveness can be greatly enhanced.

Employment of Task Specific Mnemotechnics

Examples of task specific mnemotechnics that have been discussed

in this paper include those mnemotechnics provided for Morse Code

learning and those mnemotechnics provided for the learning of the

referents of .pictorial symbols. Some of the more generally

applicable mnemotechnics can also be applied to specific tasks. For

example, a linking mnemotechnic can be used to learn the chain of

command or a pegword mnemotechnic could be used to train sentries in

their general orders. Finally, specific mnemotechnics can be

developed on an ad hoc basis. That is, on the basis of an analysis

of the memory demands of a given training task, a new mnemotechnic
could be developed to facilitate the learing of the task. It should

be realized that it was essentially in this manner that other

mnemotechnics were developed in the first place.

In the training situation, then, the student would not simply be

given a specific task or some information and told to learn it. In

addition, he would be given instructions into how to go about

learning the material, i.e., the mnemotechnic. This approach is

compatible with a standard lecture format as well as some form of

individualized instruction (e.g., computer assisted instruction or a

programmed text).

General Mnemotechnical Training

Yet another approach is to develop the general mnemonic

proficiency of individuals. The idea is to provide formal

mnemotechnical training, perhaps in the context of a general

learning strategies course. Here individuals would be provided

training in the mnemotechnics presented in this paper as well as

being trained to develop ad hoc mnemotechnics of their own. The

amount of training required to become a proficient mnemonist is an

empirical question.

If any real use is to be made of mnemonics and mnemotechnics in

military training, general mnemotechnical training would be a

prerequisite at some point in the training system. Anyone,

technical writers, instructors, charged with incorporating mnemonics

into training materials sLould be given general mnemotechnical

training. Whether other individuals should be given general

mnemotechnical training is another empirical question. Perhaps

general mnemotechnical training would have the same beneficial

effect that general physical training has in physical tasks. Then

again, perhaps, it would not. The question is an empirical one.

The next issue to be addressed concerns what type of individuals can

potentially benefit from mnemcnics and mnemotechnics.

Personnel Characteristics

Research needs to focus constantly on the characteristics of

individuals who are able to benefit from mnemonics and

mnemotechnics. Although, since it has been shown that some mental

retardates can benefit from mnemonics (Wanschura and Borkowski,

1974), it is reasonable to assume that some sort of mnemonics should

be beneficial for all military personnel, there still are boundary

conditions. It should be remembered that in the paired-associate

task employed by Griffith and Actkinson (1978), only personnel with

GT Scores 110 or over were able to benefit from a rhyme pegword

mnemotecnnic. Perhaps lower aptitude personnel would not benefit

from general mnemotechnical training but need to have specific

mnemonics supplied to them in their training materials. Perhaps

49
higher aptitude personnel benefit more if they are provided general

mnemotechnical training. The preceding are merely conjectures

awaiting experimental validation. Attention needs to be paid to the

aptitude levels of personnel participating in mnemonics research.

Motivational Considerations

The generation of mnemonics requires mental effort.

Experimental evidence exists to this effect (Griffith, 1976). There

is anecdotal evidence that people knowledgeable of appropriate

mnemotechnics do not always employ them. And it is a truism that

human beings do not always behave in a optimal manner. Thus, it is

possible that even given good mnemonics or good mnemotechnical

training, individuals would not employ them. Individuals must be

convinced of the utility of mnemonics and mnemotechics if they are

to be maximally effective. For individuals who are not motivated to

learn, memory aids are unlikely to make any difference. Moreover,

mnemonics and mnemotechnics can be easily parodied and ridiculed. A

good attitude is needed for mnemonics and mnemotechnics to be

effective. In short, motivational factors must not be overlooked.

Mnemonics, Mnemotechnics, and Research on Learning Strategies

At the beginning of this paper mnemotechnics were introduced as

techniques for learning apparently meaningless materials. They were

distinguished from learning strategies, in that learning strategies

were techniques for learning meaningful material. Actually, it

might be more appropriate to think of mnemotechnics and learning

strategies along a continuum. To the extent that information to be

learned appears meaningless, mnemotechnics can be employed. As

materials become more meaningful learning strategies which exploit

the inherent structure of the to be learned material can be

employed. This paper has focused on mnemotechnics because the

research on mnemotechnics was substantive enough to warrant a report

in its own right. Although the current body of' research on learning

strategies is not as voluminous as that on mnemotechnics (O'Neal,

1978), it is hpped that it will rapidly grow. Military trainers

need to be aware that current development in experimental and

educational psychology have direct training implications. It is

hoped that the training community will not miss the benefits of this

"cognitive revolution."

5O
Reference Notes

1. Wallace, W. H., Turner, S. H., and Perkins, C. C.Preliminary

Studies of human information storage. Signal Corps Project

No. 1320, Institute for Cooperation Research, University

of Pennsylvania, 1957.

2. Montague, W. E., and Carter, J. The loci mnemonic

technique in learning and memory. Paper presented at

the meeting of the American Educational Research

Association, Chicago, April 1974.

3. Crovitz, H. F. Mnemonics and the total-time hypothesis.

Paper presented at the meeting of the Psychonomic Society,

Denver, November, 1975.

4. Chase, W. G., and Ericsson, A. Acquisition of a mnemonic

system for digit span. Paper presented at the meeting

of the Psychonomiic Society, San Antonio, November, 1978

5. Senter, R. F. Personal Communication, 6 October, 1976

References

Ainsworth, J. S. Symbol learning in Navy technical training: an

evaluation of' strategies and mnemonics. (TAEG Report No. 661)

Orlando, FL: Training Analysis and Evaluation Group,

January, 1979.

Andreoff, G. R., and Yariney, A. D. Bizarre imagery and

association learning: a confirmation. Perceptual and Motor

Skills, 197 h 43, 143-146.

Atkinson, R. C. and Raugh, M. R. An application of the mnemonic

keyword method to the acquisition of a Russian vocabulary.

Journal of Experimental Psycholo L: Human Learnin and Memory,

1975, 104, 126-123.

Atkinson, h. C. and Shiffrin, R. M. Human Memory: A proposed system

and its control processes. In K. W. Spence and J. T. Spence

(Eds.), The psychoog of learning and motivation: Advances in

Research and Theory, Vol II New York: Academic Press, 1968.

bartlett, F. C. Rememberins. Cambridge (Englano): Cambridge

University Press, 1932.

-I1
Bennior, R. B. Response mode and memory coding strategies:

a study in learning of Chinese-English pairs. Unpublished

doctoral dissertation, Brigham Young University, 1974.

Berla, E., Persensky, F. F., and Senter, R. J. Learning time

with a mnemonic system. Psychonomic Science, 1969, 16, 207-208.

Bjork, R. A. The updating of human memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.),

The Psychology of learning and motivation, Vol 12. New York:

Academic Press, 1978.

Borges, M. A., Arnold, R. C., and McClure, V. L. Effect of

mnemonic encoding techniques on immediate and delayed serial

learning. Psychological Reports, 1976, 38, 915-921.

Bobrow, S. A. and Bower, G. H. Comprehension and recall of

sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969, 80,

455-461.

Bower, G. H. How to .... Uh .... Remember! Psychology Today,

October, 1973.

bower, G. H., and Clark, M.C. Narrative stories as mediators

for serial learning. Psychnoniic Science, 1969, 14, 181-181.

bower, G. H., and Karlin, 14. B. Depth of processing pictures of

faces and recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology

1974, 103, 751-757.

Bower, G. H., and Reitman, J. S. Mnemonic elaboration in

multilist learning: Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal

Behavior, 1972, 11, 478-485.

bower, G. H., and Winzenz, D. Comparison of associative learning

strategies. Psychonomic Science, 1970, 20, 119-120.

Braby, R., Kincaid, J. P., and Aagard, F. A. Use of mnemonics in

training materials: a guide for technical writers.

(TAEG Report No. 60). Orlando, FL. U. S. Navy Training

Analysis and Evaluation Group, July, 1978 (NTIS No. ADA064218).

Briggs, 6. G., Hawkins, S., and Crovits, H. F. Bizarre images

in artifical memory. Psychonomic Science, 1970, 19, 353-354

bruner, J., Goodnow, J., and Austin, G. A study of thinking.

New York: Wiley, 1956.

Bugelski, B. R. Images as mediators in one-trial paired-associate

learning 1I: Self-timing in successive lists. Journal of

Eperimental Psych oloy, 1968, 77, 328-_ 314.
Bugelski, B. R. The image as mediator in one-trial paired-associate

learning: III sequential functions in serial lists. Journal

of Experimental Psychology, 1974, 103, 298-303.

Bugelski, B. R., Kidd, E., and Segmen, J. Image as a mediator

in one-trial paired-associate learnin6. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1968, 76, 69-73.

Buonassissi, J. V., Blick, K. A., and Kibler, J. A. Evaluation

of experimenter-supplied and subject-originated descriptive-story

mnemonics in a free-recall task. Psychological Reports, 1972,

30, 648.

Carlson, R. F., Kincaid, P. J., Lance, S., and Hodgson, T.

Spontaneous use of mnemonics and grade point average.

The Journal of Psychology 1976, 92, 117-122.

Chase, W. A., and Simon, H. A. Perception in chess. Cognitive

Psychology, 1973, 4, 55-81.(a).

Chase, W. G., and Simon, H. A. The mind's eye in chess. In

W. G. Chase (Ed.), Visual information processing. New York:

Academic Press, 1973. pp. 216-281. (b)

Chuang, C. S. The effect of elaboration and response made upon

acquisition of Chinese ideographs. Unpublished masters'

thesis, Brigham Young University, 1974.

Crovitz, H. F. Memory loci in artifical memory. Psychonomic

Science, 1969, 16, 82-83.

Vansereau, D. F., Collins, K. W., McDonald, B. A., Holley, C. D.,

Garlana, J., Diekhoff, A., and Evans, S. H. Development and

evaluation of a learning strategy training program. Journal

of Educational Psychology, 1979, 71, 64-73.

Delin, P.-S. Success in recall as a function of success in

implementation of mnemonic instructions. Psychonomic Science,

1968, 12, 153-154.

Delin, P. S. The learning to criterion of a serial list with and

without mnemonic instructions. Psychonomic Science, 1969a,16,

169-170.

Delin, P. S. The Learning and retention of English words with

successive approximations to a complex mnemonic instruction.

Psychonomic Science, 1969b, 17, 87-89.

Delprato, D. J., and Baker, E. J. Concreteness of peg words in

two mnemonic systems. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1974,

102, 520-522.

H_-
Dyer, J. C., and Meyer, P. A. Facilitation of siriple concept

identification through mnemonic instruction. Journal of

xperimental Psychology:

Hurian Learning and Memjory, 1976, 6, 767-773.

Foth, D. L. Mnemonic technique effectiveness as a function of

word abstractness and mediation instructions. Journal of

Verb-al Learning and Verbal Beha.vior, 1973, 12, 239-245.

Furst, B. The practical way to a better memory. New York:

Fawcett World Library, 1957. -

Uamst, G., arid Freund, J. S. Effects of subject-generated stories

on recall. Bulletin of the Ps ycho norni c Societ y, 1978, 12,

165-188.

Uartman, J. A., and Blick, K. A. Retention of word-pairs for

experimenter-supplied and subject-originated mnemonics.

P?_ychological Reports, 19Y4, 35, 1099-11011.

Griffith, D. Comparison of control processes for recognition

and recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human

Learning and Memory, 1975, 1, 223-228.

Griffith, D. The attentional demands of mnemonic control processcs.

Memory and Cognition, 1976, -4, 103-108.

Griffith, D., and Actkinson, T. R. Internationrl road signs:

interpretability anU training techniques (Research Report 1?C2)

U. S. Arriy Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social

Sciences, September, 1978. (NTIS No. AD-A061762.

Uriffith, D., and Actkinson, 1. h. Mnemonic enhancement and

general technical ability. (ARI Technical Paper 336).

Alexandria, VA: U. S. Army hesearci Institute for the

behavioral and Social Sciences, September, 1978. (NTIS No.

AD-A061314).

Groninger, L. D. Mnetmonic imagery 9nd forgettirL. Psychonomic

Science, 1971, 23, 161-163.

Hauck, P. D., Walsh, C. C., and Kroll, N. W. Visual imapery

rnemonics: common vs. bizarre mental images. Bul-letinri

of the Psychonomic Society, 1976, 7, 160.

Herrman, 1. J., Geisler, F. V., ana Atkinson, R. C. ]he serial

position functiun for lists learned by a narrative-story

mneronic. Bulletin of the _sychono_.ic Society, 1973, 2,

Y/ (-37d.

R- 4
Higbee, K. L. Can young children use mnemonics? Psychological

Reports, 1976, 38, 18.

Higbee, K. L. Your Memory: how it works and how to improve it.

Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1977

Hoffman, R. R. and Senter, R. J. Recent history of psychology:

mnemonic techniques and the psycholinguistic revolution.

The Psychological Record, 1978, 28, 3-15.

Hunt, E., and Love, T. How good can memory be? In A. W. Melton

and E. Martin(Eds.) Coding processes in human memory.

Washington, D. C.: Winston, 1972, pp. 237-260.

Interservice procedures for instructional systems development,

phase III: Develop NAVEDTRA 106A. I August 1975

Katz, A., and Paivio, A. Imagery variables in concept

identification. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal

Behavior, 1975, 14, 264-293.

Keppel, G., and Zavortink, B. Further test of the use of images

as mediators. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969, 82,

190-192.

Kibler, J. L., and Blick, K. A. Evaluation of experimenter-supplied

and subject-originated first-letter mnemonics in a free-recall

task. Psychological Reports, 1972, 30, 307-313. I.

Landauer, T. K., and Bjork, R. A. Optimum rehearsal patterns and

name learning. In M. M. Gruneberg, P. E. Morris, and

R. N. Sykes (Eds.), Practical aspects of memory. New York:

Academic Press, 1978.

Landauer, T. K., and Ross, B. H. Can simple instruction to space

practice improve ability to remember a fact? Bulletin of the

Psychonomic Society, 1971, 10, 215-21d.

Lorayne, H. How to develop a super-power meory. New York:

Frederick Fall, Inc., 1957, (published in paperback by

New Aiiierican Library, 1974).

Lorayne, N. Remembering People: the key to succes.s. New York:

Stein and Day, 1975.

Lorayne, H. and Lucas, J. The memory book. New York: Stein

and Day, 1974 (published in paperback by ballantine Books, 1915).

NcVaugh, W. H. Effects of iif teretnces in stimulus retenticn on

concept identification. Journl of Ex2erirental F_ychology,

1973, 99, 309-I'(4.
Melton, A. The situation with respect to the spacing of repetitions

and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,

1970, 9, 596-606.

Miller, G. A. The magical number seven, plus or minus two.

Psychological Review, 1956, 63, 81-97.

Monty, R. A. Spatial encoding strategies in sequential short-term

memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1968, 77, 506-508.

Murray, F. S. Effects of narrative stories on recall. Bulletin

of the Psychonomic Society, 1974, 4, 577-579.

Nappe, G. W. and Wollen, K. A. Effects of instructions to

form common and bizarre mental images on retention. Journal

of Experimental Psychology, 1973, 100, 6-8.

Nystrom, C. 0., and Gividen, G. M. Ease of learning alternative

TOS message reference codes. (ARI Technical Paper 326).

Alexandria, VA: U. S. Army Research Institute for the

Behavioral and Social Sciences, September, 1978.

(NTIS No. AV-A061697).

O'Neal, H. F. (Ed.) Learning strategies. New York: Academic Press,

1978.

Utt, C. E., Butler, D. C., Blake, R. S., and Ball, J. P. The

effect of interactive-image elaboration on the acquisition of

foreign language vocabulary. Language Learning, 1973, 23,

197-206.

vaivio, A. Effects of imagery instructions and concreteness of

remory pegs in a mnemonic system. Proceedings of the 76th

Annual convention of the American Psychological Association,

1968, 77-78.

Paivio, A. Mental imagery in associative learning and memory.

Psychological Review, 1969, 76, 3, 241-263.

Paivio, 0. Imagery and verbal processes. New York: liolt

Rinehart, and Winston, Inc., 1971.

Paivio, A., Yuille, J. C., and Madigan, S. Concreteness, imagery

and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns. Journal of

Experimental Psychology Monograph Supplement, 1968, "76,

(I, Pt.2).

Pelton, L. H. Mediational construction vs. mediational

perception in paired-associate learning. Psychonomic Science,

1969, 17, 220-221.

I-6
Persensky, J. J., and Senter, R. J. An experimental investigation

of' a mnemonic system in recall. Psycho-logical Record, 1969, 19,

4J91-499.

Pines, A. B., and Elick, K. A. Experimenter-supplied and

subject-originated Mnemonics in retention of word-pairs.

I-sychological Reports, 19741, 314, 99-106.

haugh, M. R. ana Atkinson, R. C. A mnemonic method for the

acquisition of a second-lant'uage vocabulary. Technical

Report No. 22'4, Institute for, M1athematical Studies in the

Social Sciences, Stanford University, Mareni, 19714.

(NTIS No. !AU-777099).

haugh, M. R. and Atkinson, R. C. A nlnemnonic method for

learning a second language vocabulary. Journal of Educational

Psychol(oay, 1975, 67, 1-19.

haugh, M. R. , Schupbach, R. D., and Atkinson, R. C. Teaching

a large hiussian language vocabulary by the mnemonic

keyword mTethod. Instructional Science, 1977, 6, 199- 21.

itf i tian , J . S. 6killed perception in go: deducing riemory

structures from~ inter-response times. -Cognitive Psychology,

19,76, b, 336-356.

nobertsun-l chabo, E. A. , Hausman, C. P. , and Arenbere , D.

A classical mnemionic for older learners: A trip that works!

Educational Gerontolo , 19716, 1, 215-116.

Ross, J., and Lawrence, K. A. Some observations on memory

artifice. Psychonomic Science, 1968, 13, 107-1C8.

Sadalla, E. K., and Loftness, S. Emotional images as miediators

in one-trial paired-assocuciate learnin6 . J ournal of

Experimental Psychology, 1972, 95, 295-298.

Santa, ,J. L., Ruskin, A. B., and Yio, J. H. :4nerionic systems

in free recall. Psychological Reports, 1973, 32, 1163-1170.

6chwartz, M. SubJect-generated versus experimenter-supplied

mediators in paired-associate learning. Journ-al- Of Experim-ental

Psychology, 1971, 87, 339-.)9.5.

"chwartz, M., and Walsh, M1. F. Identical subject-generated

anid experimenter-supplied mediators in paired-as.-rciate

learning. Journal of E2xperimentl Psychology, 197Y4, 1-03,

6eriter. R. J. Review of mnemonics and mrnemonoteclinics5 for improved

memory. AMRL-TR-65-180, 1965. (NTIS No. AD-629 5914).

R- 7
K

Senter, R. J. and Hauser, G. K. An experimental study of a '

mnemonic system. Psychonomic Science, 1968, 10, 289-290.

Senter, R. J., and Hoffman, R. R. Bizarreness as a nonessential

Variable in mnemonic imagery: a confirmation. Bulletin of

the Psychonomic Society, 1976, 7, 163-164.

Shiffrin, R. M. and Atkinson, R. C. Storage and retrieval

processes in long-term memory. Psychological Review, 1969, 76,

179-193.

Siegel, M. H. and Siegel, D. E. Improving memory for color.

Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1976, 7, 461- 4 64.

Slak, S. Phonemic recoding of digital information. Journal

of Experimental Psychology, 1970, 86, 398-406.

Smith, R. K., and Nobie, C. E. Effect of a mnemon c technique

applied to verbal learning and memory. Perceptical and

motor skills, 1965, 21, 123-134.

Wanschura, P. B. and Borkowski, J. G. Development and transfer

of mediational strategies by retarded children in

paired-associate learning., American Journal of Mental

Deficiency, 1974, 78, 631-639.

Webber, S. M., and Marshall, P. H. Bizarreness effects in imagery

as a function of processing level and delay. Journal of

Mental Imagery, 1978, 2, 291-300.

Weinstein, C. E. Learning of elaboration strategies.

Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas

at Austin, 1975.

Weinstein, C. E. Elaboration skills as a learning strategy.

In H. F. O'Neal (Ed.), Learning strategies. New York:

Academic Press, 1978.

Willerman, B. S. The effect of a keyword mnemonic on the

recall of French vocabulary. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,

University of Texas at Austin, 1977.

Winograd, E. Encoding operations which facilitate memory

for faces across the life span. In M. M. Gruneberg,

P. E. Morrison, and R. N. Sykes (Eds.), Practical aspects

of memory. New York: Academic Press, 1978.

Wollen, K. A., Weber, A., and Lowry, D. H. Bizarreness versus

interaction of mental images as determinants of learning,

Cognitive Psychology, 1972, 3, 518-523.

L .S
Wood, G. Mnemonic systems in recall. Journal of Educational

Psychology Monographs, 1967, 58, (6, Pt.2).

Wortman, P. M., and Sparling, P. B. Acquisition and retention

of mnemonic information in LTM. Journal of Experimental

Psychology, 19 74, 102, 22-26.

Yates, F. A. The art of memory, Chicago: The university

of Chicago Press, 1966.

R-9
Appendix

A Brief Annotated Bibliography of Some Popular Books on Memory

Cermak, Laird S. Improving Your Memory. New York: W. W. Norton

and Company, Inc., 1975. Cermak is a research psychologist who

has published extensively in the field of memory. He wrote

Improving Your Memory for the laymen, however. For the most

part, Cermak focuses upon simple means of improving memory rather

than upon elaborate mnemotechnics. After providing a brief

overview of memory, Cermak discusses the importance of focusing

attention and organization to memory. Next he discusses how

mediation can enhance memory and how imagery can be employed as a

mediator. Cermak does devote one chapter to specific mnemonics

and mnemotechnics. Here Cermak provides a discussion of the

number-consonant alphabet. Cermak's book is useful either to

someone not willing to devote the time required to developing a

genuine proficiency in mnemotechnics or as a preliminary text to

more advanced study in mnemonics.

Englewood Cliffs, N. J: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1977. Like Cermak,

Higbee is also a psychologist who has done research in the area

of human learning and memory. Higbee intended this volume to be

a compromise between an academic text and a popular book on

memory. After providing the reader with an overview of the

intent and content of the book, Higbee proceeds to review briefly

contempory theory and research in human memory. Chapter three

outlines some general principles (e.g., meaningfulness,

organization) for memory improvement. Chapter four is concerned

primarily with learning strategies useful for the retention of

meaningful material (e.g., most prose). The remainder of the

book is concerned with mnemonics and mnemotechnics. Chapter five

provides an overview of mnemonics and mnemotechnics. Chapters

six, seven, eight, and nine are concerned with the link, loci,

pegword, and number-consonant mnemotechnics, respectively.

Chapter ten discusses some ad hoc mnemotechnics. Two appendices

are included. One provides practice words for visual

associations and the other provides words for use in the

number-consonant alphabet. The work is amply documented with

footnotes. Higbee has provided one of the most extensive reviews

on the existing literature in mnemonics and mnemotechnics.

Lorayne, Harry. How to develop a super-power memory. New York:

Frederick F L1, Inc., 1957. Lorayne is a professional mnemonist

and memcry teacher. In spite of the hype in the title, this is

an instructive book on many of the mnerrtechnics discussed in

this report. In fact, one of the mnemotechnics for Morse Code

learning cor.s directly from this book. At the beginning of this

book, Loray e provides a series of memory tests. After having

A-I
read the book and practiced the techniques the reader can retake

the memory exams to estimate the benefit derived from the book.

Lorayne, Harry. Remembering people: the key to success.

New York: Stein and Day, 1975. Just as the title indicates,

this book is concerned exclusively with mnemotechnics for

remembering people, what their names, positions, etc. are. The

topic is thoroughly developed and exercises are provided so that

the reader can practice the techniques.

Lorayne, Harry, and Lucas, Jerry. The memory book. New York:

Stein and Day, 19 74 (published in paperback by Ballantine Books,

1975). This popular book on memory actually made the national

best seller lists. Essentially, it contains most of the material

from Lorayne's earlier book (How to Develop a Super-Power

Memory). Each chapter begins with some banter between mnemonist

Lorayne and basketball player and mnemonist Lucas. Again the

presentations of specifici mnemotechnics are most instructive.

Weinland, James D. How to improve your memory. New York:

Barnes and Noble, 1957. Weinland is a retired psychologist.

Written in 1957, the book provides a brief review of research and

theory in memory until that time. Like Higbee, Weinland

footnotes liberally, providing a very useful review of the

literature. Although the book does discuss specific

mnemotechnics, it concentrates more on the development of general

memory and study techniques.

A-2
DISTRIMIUTION

ARI Distribution List

4 OASO IM&RAI 2 HOUSACDEC, Ft Ord, ATTN: Library

2 HODA IOAMI-CSZI I HOUSACOEC. Ft Ord. ATTN: ATEC-EX-E -Hunm Factors

1 I400A IDAPE-PBR) 2 USAEEC, Ft Benjamin Harrison, ATTN: Library

I I400A (OAMA-AR) I USAPACOC. Ft Benjamin Harrison. ATTN: ATCP-HR

1 HODA iDAPE-HRE.PO) 1 USA Comm-Elect Sds. Ft Monmouth, ATTN: ATSN-EA

I HOOA (SGAD-ID) I USAEC. Ft Monmouthi, ATTN: AMSEL-CT-HOP

1 HODA IOAMI-OOT-C) I USAEC. Ftr Monmouth, ATTN: AMSE L-PA-P

I HODA (OAPC PMZ-A) 1 USAEC. Ft Monmouth, ATTN: AMSEL-SI -CS

I I400A LDACM-PPZ-A) 1 USAEC. Ft Monmouth. ATTN: C, Fad Day Sr

1 HODA IDAPE-H RE) 1 USA Matqrials Sys Anal Agcy. Aberdeen, ATTN: AMXSY-P

I HODA (OAPE-MPO-CI I Edgewood Arsenal. Aberdeen. ATTN! SAREA-SL-H

1 1400A (OAPE-OW) I USA Ord Ctr & Sch, Aberdeen. ATTN: ATSIL-TEM-C

1 HODA (OAPE-HRL) 2 USA Hum Engor Lab. Aberdeen, ATTN: Library/Dir

1 HODA IOAPE-CPS) I USA Combat Arms Trig Sd. Ft Banning. ATTN: Ad Supervisor

1 HODA (DAFO.MFA) 1 USA Infantry Hum ich Unit. Ft Banning, AimN: Chief

1 HOCA (DARD-ARS-Pi 1 USA Infantry Bd. Ft Banning, AimN: STEBC-TE-T

1 HODA iOAPC-PAS-A) I USASMA. Ft Bliss. ATTN: ATSS-LRC

I HODA IDUSA-ORI 1 USA Air 0.1 Scit, Ft Bliss, AimN: ATSA-CTD-ME

1 HODA (DAMO-ROR) 1 USA Air Def Scis. Ft Bliss. AimN: Tech Lib

T HODA DOASG) I USA Air 0.1 Bil. Ft Bliss. ATTN: FILES

I HODAI(OAIO.PII I USA Air Oaf 9d, Ft Slits. ATTN: STIEBO-PO

I Chief. Consult Div I0A.OTSG). Adelphi. MO 1 USA Cmd & General St College. Ft Leavenworth. ATTN: Lob

I Nli Asst. Hunm Res. ODDR&E. DAD IE&LS11 1 USA Cmii & General SO1 College, Ft Leavenworth. ATTN: ATSW-SEI HO USARAL. APO Seattle. ATTN: ARAGP R 1 USA Cnsd & General Stf College., Ft Leavenworth. ATTN: Ed Advisor

1 HO First Army. AimN: AFKA-Ol.Ti I USA Com5,ined Arms Cmbi 0ev Act. Ft Leavenworthi, AimN: O@PCdr

2 HO Fiftht Army. Ft Sent Houston I USA Combined Anne Cnttt 0ev Act. Ft Leavenworth. AimN: CCS

I Dir. Army St Studies Oft. ATTN: OAVCSA I SP11 1 USA Combned Antis Cmbt Dev Act. Ft Leavenworth. AimN: ATCASA

1 Oft Chief of Sit. Studies Ofc 1 USA Combined ArmtssCmbt 0en, Act. Ft Leavenworth. AimN: ATCACO-E

T OCSIPER, AimN: CPS/OCP 1 USA Comined Aitts Ciivbt Dan, Act. Ft Leavenworth, ATTN: ATCACC-CI

I The Army Lob. Pentagon. ATTN: RISB Chief I USAECOM. Night Vision Lab. Ft Balsam. AimN: AMSEL-NV-SD

I The Army Lib. Pentagon. ATTN: A7'RAL 3 USA Compuwe Sys Crnd. Fr Selsoir. ATTN: Tech Library

1 Ofc. Anit Sect of the Army IR&DI 1 USAMERDC. Ft Belvoir ATTN: STSFB-D0

1 Techt Support Ofe. OJCS 1 USA Eng Scit, Ft Beivoir. ATTN: Library

1 USASA. Arlington. AimN: LARO-T 1 USA Tooograohic Lab. Ft Belvoir. ATTN: ETL-TO-S

1 USA Fisch Ofc. Durham. ATTN: Life Sciences Dir 1 USA Topographic Lao. Ft Belivoir. ATTN: STINFO Center

2 USARIEM. Natick. ATTN- SGRO-UE-CA I USA Toograofhic Lab. Ft Belvoir. AimN: ETL-GSL

1 USATTC. Ft Clayton. ATTN: STETC-MOA I USA intelligence Ctu & Scit. Ft Huachuce. ATTN: CTD-MS

I USAIMA. Ft Bragg, ATTN: ATSU-CT0-OM I USA Intelligence Ct, & Scis. Ft Huacliuca. AimN: ATS-CTD-MS

I USAiMA. Ft Brang. AimN: Martiuat Lib I USA intelligence Ctr & Sch. Ft Huachuca. ATTN: ATSI-TE

I US WAC Ct, & Sch. Ft McClellan. ATTN: Lib I USA Intelligence Cir & Scit. Fr Huachuca, AimN: ATSI-TEX -GS

I US WAC Ctr & Sd'. Ft McClellan, ATTN: Tng Dir 1 USA Inltelligence Ctr So Sch. Ft Huactuca. ATTN! ATSI-CTS-OR

I USA Quartermaster Sch. Ft Lot Aim.: ATSM-TE I USA Intelligence Cjr & Sch. Ft Huacltuca. ATTN: ATSI-CTD-OT

I Intelligence Material Don, Ofc. EWL. Ft Holabirti 1 USA intelligence Ctr A Sch. Ft Huachuca. ATTN- ATSI-CTD-CS

' USA SE Signal So. Ft Gordon. ATTN. ATSO.EA I USA Intelligence Ctr &m Sch. Ft Huachuca. ATTN: DASISRO

I USA Chaplain Ctr & Sch. Ft Hamilton, ATTN: ATSC-TE RD 1 USA Intelligence Cit & Seti. Ft Huscituca. ATTN: ATSI-TEM

I UJSATSCH. Ft Eustis, ATTN Educ Advisor I USA Intelligence Ctr & Seti. Ft HuechuCa, ATTN- Library

1 USA War College. Carlisle Barracks, ATTN: Lob 1 CDR. 140 Ft Huacliuca, AimN: Tech Relf Onv

2 WRAIR, Nessropsychmatry Div 2 CDR. USA Electronic Pir" Ged, ATTN: STEEP-MT-S

I OLI. SDA. Monterey I HO. TCATA_ ATim' Tecs Library

1 USA Concept Anal Aqcy. Bethesda. AimN: MOCA-M R 1 MCI. TCATA. AimN: AT CAT-OPO., Ft Hood

I USA Concept Anal Agcy. Bethesda. AimN MOCA..JF I USA Recruting Cmii. Ft Sheridan. ATTN: USARCPftI-P

I USA Arctic Teet Ctr. APO Seattle. ATTN. STEAC-PL-M[ I Senior Army Ads.. USAFAGOD/TAC. Elgin AF Aus Fid No.9

I USA Arctic Test Ctr. APO Seattle. ATTN: AMSTE-PL.TS 1 140. USARIPAC, OCSPER. APO SF 96S5B. AimN: GPPE SE

I USA Armament Cmod. Redstne Arsenal, ATTN: ATSK-TEM I Stinticn Lib. Academy of Meelth Sciences. Ft Sam Houston

I USA Armament Cond. Rock Island. ATTN: AMSAR-TOC 1 Marine Corms I nst.. AimN: Dean-MCI

I FAA.NAFeC. AtlanticCity. ATTN: Library 11MO. USMC, Commandant. AimN: Code MThIT

I F AANAFEC Atlantic Cry, ATTN: Human Engr Sr I 140. USMC. Cominendent. ATrTN -Code MPI -20G28

I FAA Aeronautical Ct. Oklahoma Cryv. AT-N: AAC 440 2 USCG Acadeomy. Now London. Aim' Admission

2 USA FId Arty Scit. Ft Sill. ATTN: Library 2 USCG Academy. New London. ATTN* L ibrsr

1 USA Armor Scit, Ft Knox. AimN: Lit~rrv I USCG Training Ctr. NY. A rTN CO

I USA Armor Sch Ft Knox. AimN ATSB.Ol*-e I USCG Training Ct. NY. AimN Educ Svc Ole

I USA Armor Sc". Ft Knox. ATTN: ArSB.T-P I USCG. Psychoi Ross Br. DC. ATTN GP 1.62

1 USA Armor Sch, Ft Knox. ATTN- ATSS-CD AD I NO Mid-Range Br, MC ot. Duantico. AimN P&S DON

14-
IUS Marine Corps L.a~scin Otc. AMC. Alexandria, ATTN AMCGS-F I Det & Civi Inst of Enairo Medicine, Canada

I USATRADOC. Ft Monroo. ATTN ATRO-ED I AIR CRESS. Kerington, ATTN Info Sys Br

6 USATRADOC. Ft Monroe. ATTN: ATPR-AD 1 MilltaerOSVkologisk Tioneste Caoenhaqprn

I LSATRADOC. Ft Monroe. ATTN ATTS-EA I MhtaerV Attach*,~ Ffench Emoassy. ATTN Doc Sec

I USA Forces Cmd. FT McPherson, ATTN Librarv IMertecin Cher C E.R PA -Arsenai Touion,Navag France

I 

2USA 

USA 

Aviation 

Agcy for 

Test 

Aviation 

Bd. F, 

Safety. 

Ruckser. 

Ft Rucker. 

ATTN STEBG-PO 

ATTN Library 

I 

ot 

Prin 

Defense. 

Sc~entific 

Now 

Off. 

Delhi

Ap Hurm Engr Rscm On, VMnstrv 1 I USA Agcy fot Aviation Safety. Ft Rucker. ATTN: Edac Advisor I Pets Rsch Ole L~brary. AK(A. Israel Defense Forces

I USA Aviation Scn. Ft Racker, ATTN: PO Drawer 0 1 Ministefis ian Defense. DOOPIKL Afa Sociaal

I HOUSA Aviation Sys Cmd. St Louis. ATTN: AMSAV-ZDR Psvctroiogisnhe Zaken, The Hague Netherianas

2 USA Asiation Sys Test Act., Edwards AFB. ATTN: SAVTE-T

I USA Air Dot Sch. Ft Bliss, ATTN: ATSA rEm

I USA Air Mobilty Rich & Des Lab. Moffett Fid. ATTN SAVOL-AS

IUSA Aviation Sdf. Res Trig Mgt. Ft Rucker, ATTN ATST-T-RTM

I USA Aviation Sch. CO. Ft Racker. ATTN. ATST-D-A

1 HO, DARCOM, Alexandria, ATTN AMXCD-TL

I NO. DARCOM. Alexandri, ATTN CDR

I US Military Academy. West Point. ATTN: Seeias Unit

I US Military Academy. West Point. ATTN: Ole of Mil~t Ldrshp

1 US Military Academy. West Point, ATTN: MAOR

I USA Standardization Go, UK. FPO NY. ATTN- MASE-GC

I Ofc of Naval Rid,, Arlington. ATTN Coda 452

3 Qfc of Naval ich, Arlington. ATTN: Code 458

1 Ofc: of Naval Rsch, Arlington, ATTN Code 450

1 Ofc if Naval RiCh, Arlington. ATTN Coce 441

1 Naval Aerospc Mod Res Lab, Pensacola ATTN ACoas Scm Div

I Nasal Aerosoc Med Res Lab, Pensacola. ATTN Colle L51

I Naval Aerosoc Meo Res Liu. Pensacola ATTN Code L-5

I Chi~ef of Navers. ATTN Pers OR

I NAVAIRSTA. Nrfolk, ATTN Safety Ctu

INair Oceanographic. DC. ATTN. Code 62S1 Charts & ecm

I Canter of Naval Anal, ATTN Doc Ctr

I NavAnrSysCor. ATTN AIR.-5313C

I Nav BaMed, ATTN 713

1 NavH*ecoplarSbSqsa 2. FPO SF 96601

1 AFfIRL I FTI Wriiams AFS

I AFHRL (TT) Lowry AFS

IAFHRL (AS) WPAFS. ON4

2 AFrIRL 1DOJZI Brooks AFB

1AFHRL (DCJNI LackanPd AFB

I HOUSAF ONYSOI

I HOUSAF (DPXXAt

I AFVTG (RD) Randolph AFS

3 AMRL (HE) WPAFB, 04

2 AF nit of Tech. WPAFB. Off. ATTN. ENESL

IArC XPTDI Randolphr AFB

I USAF AeroMeri Lib. Brooks AFB (SUL -41. ATTN DOC SEC

I AFOSR iNLI. Arlington

I AF Log Cmd. McClellan AFB, ATTN ALC.OPCRB

.Ar Force Academy. CO. ATTN: Deptrof Sel Scn,

S Namers & Dev Ctr. San Diego

2 Na&vy Med Neruroosyrcrratric Rich Unit. San Diego

I Jay Erectronic Lab. Son Diego. ATTN- Res Lab

1Nav TrnngCan. San Diego. ATTN: Code 9000- Ljb

INaslaostGraSch Monterey. ATTN: Code 5SAa

I NavPostGraSch. Monterey. ATTN- Code 2124

1 NasTrnqEquaoCtr, Orlando, ATTN, Tech L~b

I US Deot of Labor. DC. ATTN- Manpovw Admn

I US Dept of Justice. DC. ATTN. Drug Enforce Admits

I Nat Bur of Standards. DC. ATTN Computer Info Section

I Nat Clearinq House for MN-Info. Rockville

I 0enr Federal Ctr Lakewood. ATTN BLM

*2 Defense Documentation Center

41 Dr, Pi,rr Army Ha. Rusel Oles Canoerra

3 I c in~ir 8 d Army rf'2 6 use QsCate

.ini A.. Atrachin Aastran Etnrassy

.entre qe iecrmercne Des FicTears, Har'.anele? a Oatons.,

lam ,t.o'nt Staff .Vasr'nqton

A f. iiaff Royal Canag-an AF ATTNJ Deis Sta Anas g'

2 h' asian Del As,, Staff ArrN C CRDSIW'

I' sD-1 S!art 6' 'Sr v ina esnnlon