Introduction

Chapter 2

2.2 Modern techniques and methods of memorization

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

Throughout human history, people have tried to come up with ways in which they could acquire any knowledge as firmly as possible. Since ancient times, the topic and technique of memorization has occupied inquisitive minds, was considered and systematized by the great people of the past. A special term appeared, borrowed from Greek - mnemonics, meaning the art of memorization.

The volume of general and professional knowledge in the world has increased many times over the last century compared to previous centuries. At the same time, there is an increasing increase in it, constant replenishment with an increasing amount of new information. Therefore, the development of memory, the improvement of the processes of memorization, preservation and reproduction of information is one of the most urgent tasks of a person in modern society. The study and application of certain methods, techniques and methods of memorization significantly contributes to the qualitative and quantitative improvement of memorization and retention of the necessary information in memory.

The knowledge of these techniques is especially important for students and schoolchildren, since the assimilation of educational material, general educational or special information is the main area of ​​their activity. And without the ability to process, analyze, assimilate, systematize and firmly retain in memory what has been studied, the learning process will lose all meaning for them.

Mastering the methods of memorizing information is one of the issues of familiarization with the forms and methods of the scientific organization of teaching students, develops their skills in working with educational and scientific literature, and contributes to the successful acquisition of knowledge necessary for educational and research activities.

The purpose of this essay is to consider theoretical and practical recommendations for improving the memorization mechanism by applying certain methods and techniques.

Chapter 1

1.1 Memory as the basis of human mental activity

Our memory is based on associations - connections between individual events, facts, objects or phenomena reflected and fixed in our minds.

"Memory is a reflection of a person's past experience, manifested in remembering, preserving and then recalling what he perceived, did, felt or thought about."

The forms of manifestation of memory are very diverse. Their classification was based on three criteria: the object of memorization, the degree of volitional control of memory, and the duration of information storage in it.

According to the object of memory, they distinguish figurative, which includes visual, auditory, tactile, olfactory and taste memory; verbal-logical expressed in thoughts, concepts, verbal formulations; motor, also called motor or kinesthetic; emotional, the memory of the experienced feelings.

According to the degree of volitional regulation, goals and methods of memorization, memory is divided into involuntary(without a previously set goal to remember) and arbitrary(stretched by an effort of will).

According to the degree of duration of information storage, memory is divided into short-term, acting only a few minutes; long-term, characterized by the relative duration and strength of the perceived material and operational, which stores information only for the time necessary to perform an operation. The object of this work is the verbal-logical long-term arbitrary memory, which is the basis of successful education at the university.

Depending on how successfully a person remembers information, visual (visual), auditory (auditory), motor (kinesthetic) and mixed (visual-auditory, visual-motor, auditory-motor) types of memory are distinguished.

1.2 Memorization, its features

Memory as a mental activity is subdivided into the processes of memorization, preservation/forgetting, reproduction and recognition. Memorization is the establishment of a connection between the new and what is already in the human mind, "the consolidation of those images and impressions that arise in the mind under the influence of objects and phenomena of reality in the process of sensation and perception".

Memorization can be involuntary (random) or arbitrary (purposeful). Arbitrary memorization is ranked according to the degree of accuracy of the future reproduction of the material. In some cases, only the general meaning, the essence of thoughts, is remembered and reproduced. In other cases, it is necessary to memorize and reproduce the exact, literal verbal expression of thoughts (rules, definitions, etc.). Memorizing the meaning is memorizing the general and essential aspects of the educational material and distracting from irrelevant details and features. The selection of the essential depends on the understanding of the material itself, on what is the most important and significant in it, and what is secondary. It is closely connected with the processes of thinking, with the mental development of a person, with the stock of his knowledge. Memorization - a variant of the highest fidelity in arbitrary memorization - is used especially often in the educational process. It implies "systematic, planned, specially organized memorization using certain techniques."

The reproduction of verbal material without understanding its meaning is not logical, but mechanical memorization, memorization of individual parts of the material without relying on the semantic connection between them. Material memorized mechanically, without sufficient understanding, is subject to more rapid forgetting ". "Meaningful (semantic) memorization is based on understanding the meaning, awareness of relationships and internal logical connection both between parts of the memorized material, and between this material and previous knowledge ".

Chapter 2

2.1 The emergence and development of mnemonics

Most of human history took place before the advent of writing. In primitive communities, the memory of the lives of individuals, the history of families and tribes was transmitted orally. What was not kept in individual memory or transmitted in the process of oral communication was forever forgotten. In such unliterate cultures, memory was subject to constant exercise, and memories were subject to preservation and renewal. Therefore, the art of memory was especially important in the pre-literate periods of human history. So priests, shamans, storytellers had to memorize huge amounts of knowledge. Special people - elders, bards - became the guardians of social culture, able to retell epic narratives that capture the history of any society.

Even after the advent of writing, the art of memorization has not lost its relevance. A very small number of books, the high cost of writing materials, the large mass and volume of the written book - all this encouraged memorizing the text. A system of techniques that improve the use of memory - the so-called mnemonics - apparently, more than once independently arose and developed in many cultures.

The first texts on mnemonics known to us were created by the ancient Greeks, although in written sources the first mention of it belongs to the Romans. The treatise "De oratore" ("On the speaker") by the Roman statesman and writer Cicero contains the first mention of mnemonics. Cicero attributes the discovery of the rules of memorization to the poet Simonides, who lived in the fifth century BC. This first technique suggested keeping in mind a picture of some places and placing mental images of memorized objects in these places. As a result, the order of places will preserve the order of items. In such mnemotechnical systems, memories are stored by "binding" them to elements of a well-known environment - usually a house with its rooms, and the objects to be memorized are mentally placed along the chain of such elements. After that, they are easy to remember if the speaker follows this chain with his "inner vision", moving from one element to another. Another Latin text by an unknown author entitled "Ad Herennium" defines memory as a lasting preservation, assimilation by the mind of objects, words and their relative position. This text is about how to choose images that, among other things, can give an idea of ​​the organization of remembered objects.

The art of memorization was also developed by medieval monks who had to memorize a huge amount of liturgical texts. In the Middle Ages, it was mainly reduced to the methods of memorizing numbers and letters. It was believed that it was enough to memorize a sequence of drawings or inscriptions arranged in a circle, easily perceived by the eye, in order to recall the order of prayers or a list of vices and virtues on occasion. From the 14th century, the place of "recording" of remembered images began to be likened to a theater - a special "memory theater" with symbolic sculptures, similar to the statues of the ancient Roman forum, at the base of which it was possible to place objects to be memorized.

Books on mnemonics were written by Giordano Bruno. In his testimony to the tribunal of the Inquisition, he talks about his book called "On the Shadows of Ideas", which told about his mnemonic techniques. In his hands, theaters of memory became a means of classifying and comprehending the essence of the universe and nature, models of heaven and hell.

In the scientific world, memorization is carried out mainly through analogy, especially in the exact sciences. We try to understand the unknown by comparing it with what we already know. So, Rutherford in his theory compared electrons moving in orbits around the atomic nucleus with planets circling the Sun. Here the analogy is needed only in order to create a clear visual image.

Fig.3.

From early childhood, the process of developing a child's memory goes in several directions. First, mechanical memory is gradually supplemented and replaced by logical memory. Secondly, over time, direct memorization turns into indirect memorization, associated with the active and conscious use of various mnemonic techniques and means of memorizing and reproducing various mnemonic techniques and tools for memorization and reproduction. Thirdly, involuntary memorization, which dominates in childhood, becomes voluntary in an adult.

Voluntary and involuntary memory

The original form of memorization is the so-called unintentional or involuntary memorization, i.e. memorization without a predetermined goal, without the use of any techniques. It is a mere imprint of what has acted, the preservation of some trace of excitation in the cerebral cortex.

Much of what a person encounters in life is involuntarily remembered: surrounding objects, phenomena, events of everyday life, people's actions, the content of films, books read without any educational purpose, etc., although not all of them are remembered equally well. It is best to remember what is of vital importance for a person: everything that is connected with his interests and needs, with the goals and objectives of his activity. Even involuntary memorization is selective, determined by the attitude to the environment.

From involuntary memorization, it is necessary to distinguish voluntary memorization, which is characterized by the fact that a person sets himself a specific goal - to remember what is planned, and uses special memorization techniques. Voluntary memorization is a special and complex mental activity that is subordinate to the task of remembering and includes a variety of actions performed in order to better achieve this goal.

Often, arbitrary memorization takes the form of memorization, i.e. repeated repetition of educational material until its complete and error-free memorization. So, for example, by memorizing verses, definitions, laws, formulas, historical dates, etc. The set goal - to remember - plays an important role, determining the entire activity of memorization. Other things being equal, voluntary memorization is noticeably more productive than involuntary memorization.

The setting of special tasks has a significant impact on memorization; under its influence, its very process changes. However, according to S.L. Rubinshtein, the question of the dependence of memorization on the nature of the activity during which it is performed is of primary importance. He believes that in the problem of memorization there is no unambiguous relationship between voluntary and involuntary memorization. And the advantages of arbitrary memorization with their obviousness appear only at first glance.

P.I. Zinchenko in this convincingly proved that the setting for memorization, which makes it the direct goal of the subject's action, is not in itself decisive for the effectiveness of this process, involuntary memorization can be more effective than voluntary. In Zinchenko's experiments, the involuntary memorization of pictures in the course of activity, the purpose of which was their classification (without the task of remembering), turned out to be definitely higher than in the case when the subjects were given the task of remembering the pictures.

A study by A.A. Smirnova confirmed that involuntary memorization can be more productive than voluntary: what the subjects memorized involuntarily, along the way in the process of activity, the purpose of which was not memorization, was remembered more firmly than what they tried to remember on purpose. An analysis of the specific conditions under which involuntary memorization, i.e., in essence, memorization included in some kind of activity, turns out to be the most effective, reveals the nature of the dependence of memorization on the activity in which it is performed.

In the process of memorization, information is entered into memory. At the same time, the elements of this material are included in the memory structure by expanding the system of associative links. Memorization (imprinting) is the basis for enriching a person with new knowledge, skills, forms of behavior. Depending on the nature and methods of implementation of this process, involuntary and voluntary memorization are distinguished. We tend to easily answer questions about what we did last night or what we ate for breakfast today, although we did not try to remember it. The events of everyday life are involuntarily remembered, especially everything new, bright, unusual. Arbitrary memorization is a purely human type of memory, which is characterized by the presence of a special mnemonic task - to remember this or that material.

Along with this, there is direct and indirect memorization. In the latter case, special means of memorization are used. For example, for better memorization of words, the subject puts aside the most suitable picture for each word or depicts the corresponding symbol. Finally, mechanical memorization (without any logical processing of the material) and semantic memorization (in which the material is presented in some system of logical connections) is often opposed.

Quite a few patterns of memorization have been established. Of practical importance are patterns, both common to involuntary and voluntary memorization, and related only to the latter type. Let's start with general patterns.

When we studied perception, we said: “It is not the eye, not the hand, and not the ear that perceives ...” Now it’s time to say: “It is not the memory that remembers, but the person, the personality with the help of memory.” The individual characteristics of a person, his actual motives of behavior and feelings, intellectual experience have a significant impact on the process of memorization and its result. From this it is clear why a student who is biased towards the content of the lesson remembers this content much better than a student who is present at the lesson “on duty”. The effectiveness of memorization depends on the significance of the memorized material for the individual. The higher this significance, the better, more qualitatively certain information is remembered.

The effectiveness of memorization depends on the place of the memorized material in the structure of activity. In the experiment of P.I. Zinchenko (1903-1969), involuntary (unintentional) memorization of two-digit numbers by the subjects a) after solving the proposed (ready-made) arithmetic problems,
b) after inventing similar problems. In the second case, all subjects (first graders, 3rd grade students and students) remembered numbers better, although not to the same extent. This means that if the material occupies the place of the goal in the structure of human activity (after all, in the second case, the numbers had to be found, selected), then it is remembered better than the material related to the conditions of this activity (the numbers are given in finished form). This pattern has also been confirmed in studies on voluntary memorization.

There are many studies that have studied the dependence of memorization on the nature of the mental activity of the subject. So, it was found that the deeper the material is analyzed (the effect of the depth of processing), the better it is preserved and subsequently used. Other works show that the volume and quality of memorization increase as a result of such mental actions as comparing material, classifying it, drawing up a text plan, etc. These results took shape in a pattern: memorization efficiency increases with an increase in the level of mental activity shown by the subject in the process memorization of the material.

There is also an isolation effect (the von Restorff effect), which consists in easier memorization of rare (one or more) elements placed among others that make up the majority of the series. For example, if in the list of words denoting furniture, there are two words that do not designate furniture, then they will be remembered better.

Let us now turn to the laws of arbitrary memorization.

The effectiveness of memorization increases with the use of reproduction as a method of long-term memorization. Such reproduction (repetition) is well known to every pupil and student. Indeed, is it possible to learn a poem or any other text without repeated attempts to reproduce it? Along with this, a student who is disappointed with the result of the exam may exclaim: “Wow, I read the textbook three times!” Probably not much would have changed if he had read it six times. After all, the effectiveness of repetition depends on the measure of its meaningfulness, which partly brings us back to the previous pattern.

From our own experience, we are familiar with the distribution effect, which found experimental confirmation in the works of G. Ebbinghaus (1850-1909): it is better to memorize quite voluminous material in parts than to try to memorize it all at once.

Memorization efficiency increases with the use of coding. Coding is the deliberate application of various ways and means of converting information into a form that is easier to remember. So, the mnemonic formula: "Every hunter wants to know where the pheasant sits" - mediates the memorization of the colors of the spectrum. There is a poem that helps more accurately than is usually necessary to remember the number "pi". Probably the simplest example of encoding is the memory knot. There are, however, more universal methods of coding, which have already been discussed to some extent: classification, semantic grouping of material, highlighting key words in the text, drawing up a presentation plan, graphical text schematization, writing abstracts, etc. Various levels of coding are experimentally studied: coding at the level of perception (perceptual coding), coding as the assignment of an object to a category, as well as coding, accompanied by an assessment of one's attitude to the object (personally-related coding).

The quality of memorization depends on the setting for the time when the memorized information is needed. Psychologist V.A. Artemov noted: “If a student is offered to learn something with a warning that he will be asked only immediately after the end of learning, it turns out that in two weeks he does not remember anything learned. His friend, who memorized the same material on the condition that he was asked not only today, but also in two weeks, gives much better results. The dependence of memorization productivity on the setting for the playback time has also received experimental confirmation.

Some data on the correlation between voluntary and involuntary memorization are also of pedagogical importance. The first, ceteris paribus, is more productive than the second. However, involuntary memorization, accompanied by active mental work with the material, turns out to be more effective than voluntary memorization, which is not accompanied by such work. This is shown in the studies of P.I. Zinchenko and A.A. Smirnov (1894-1980). Taking into account the fact that voluntary memorization in learning turns out to be a more intense process, it is considered expedient to use (to the greatest extent possible) the resources of involuntary memorization.

imprinting(memorization) - the process of memory, which results in the consolidation of new material, experience through connections with previously acquired experience.

The main conditions for the productivity of memorization are related to whether it proceeds in the form of an involuntary or arbitrary process.

Involuntary memorization- this is a natural memorization without setting specific goals. In involuntary memorization, a close connection between attention and memory is manifested. What gets into the field of attention is involuntarily remembered.

Involuntary memory is affected by:

1. Singularity of objects

2. Effective attitude to memorized material

3. Level of motivation

Rosenweig: there are times when motivation affects the degree of memory strength; sometimes, if the activity is completed, then the material is remembered as firmly (or stronger) as in the case of an unfinished activity.

4. The level of emotional coloring that accompanies the work with the material.

Experiments do not unequivocally confirm what is more remembered: with a positive or negative potential. The dynamics of emotional coloring is important, not the positive or negative coloring of emotion

Arbitrary memorization- a specific activity where there is a goal. Memorization here loses its meaning without further reproduction.

Here there is arbitrary attention, there is a selection, sorting of information that is significant and significant.

Arbitrary memorization is one of the latest mental processes that form in a person, because remembering here already requires awareness of what is being remembered.

Arbitrary memory can be divided into 2 types:

* direct memorization- simple mechanical imprinting, the material is remembered through repetition. The main mechanism here is associations by adjacency; as a result of repetition, material is imprinted, awareness is not present here. Ebbinghaus: it's "pure memory"

* mediated memorization- here thinking is connected, recoding and decoding occurs during playback. In this case, a system of various, in particular semantic, connections is built. With mediated memorization, insignificant connections can be established, in contrast to thinking. Insignificant connections during memorization are instrumental in nature, they help to reproduce the material. For example, experiments with double stimulation (Vygotsky, Leontiev): pictures and words were presented; "Knot for memory"

Factors that determine productivity, the strength of arbitrary memorization:

The amount of material (the amount of information to memorize). If the number of memorized elements exceeds the volume of perception, then the number of trials required to memorize information increases.

Homogeneity of the material. The degree of similarity reduces the strength of memorization of the material and increases the number of trials required for memorization. This is where the Restorf effect comes into play: regardless of the nature of the material

Part three. Comparative study of the involuntary

and voluntary memorization

Chapter 7

The significance of the studies described in the second part of the book lies not only in the fact that they made it possible to give a fundamentally new and meaningful characterization of involuntary memorization, but also in the fact that they served as the basis for a more correct approach to studying the features of voluntary memorization and the laws of its development.

Arbitrary memorization, unlike involuntary, both in its purpose and in the ways of achieving it, is a special mnemonic action. The initial genetic stage for him is not mechanical memorization, but from the very beginning, semantic involuntary memorization.

The fruitfulness of such a formulation of the question of the genesis of voluntary memory was convincingly shown in a study by Istomina (1948), conducted under the direction of Leontiev. Arbitrary memorization as a special mnemonic action becomes possible when special goals for remembering, recalling stand out in the child's mind. The selection and mastering of mnemonic goals depends not only on the objective conditions that require the child to set such goals, but

and from the appropriate motivation that gives the necessary meaning to these goals and, thereby, contributes to their awareness. The formation of mnemonic actions is associated with the mastery of more and more complex ways of memorization.

With the advent of arbitrary memory, involuntary memorization does not lose its significance. It continues to change and become more and more enriched as a result of the further development of the content of the activity in which it is carried out. Changes in activity create the appropriate prerequisites and conditions for the development of arbitrary memory. Therefore, the relationship between both types of memorization is not constant, they change at different stages of development of both voluntary memory and activity, which is the basis for involuntary memory. A new question for the psychology of memory arose: the relationship between involuntary and voluntary memorization in the course of memory development.

In many studies of foreign psychology, the so-called random memorization was studied in comparison with arbitrary. In a number of studies, as we noted in our review, interesting facts were obtained related to various conditions for the productivity of "random" and arbitrary memorization. However, their initial provisions and methodological paths could not lead to a correct, theoretically substantiated formulation of the problem of the relationship between involuntary and voluntary memorization. The main flaw in these studies was that they essentially did not study and compare activities that lead to involuntary and voluntary memorization.

As a typical example of such a comparative study of involuntary and voluntary memorization, Jenkins' study (1933) can serve. In this study, one subject, acting as the experimenter, read nonsense syllables to another who memorized them. A comparison of the involuntary and voluntary memorization of meaningless syllables in these two situations ruled out their meaningful characterization. But even in the best studies (Postman and Senders, 1946; Postman and Adams, 1946; Postman, Adams and Phillips, 1955; Postman and Plenderlis, 1956; Saltzman, 1953; Saltzman and Neumark, 1953; Saltzman and Atkinson, 1954; Saltzman, 1966 and others), we did not find a meaningful analysis of the activity underlying these two types of memorization. In some studies, the so-called orienting task was introduced into the situation of involuntary and voluntary memorization. However, it served as a kind of technical device for equalizing all other conditions of random and arbitrary memorization, except for the setting for memorization. The orienting task itself was not analyzed either as a condition for the implementation of involuntary memorization, or as a possible means of voluntary memorization. We are not talking about the fact that the orienting tasks introduced into the experiments were often meaningless, artificial.

Kirkpatrick (1914) and Mazo (1929) came closest to the problem of a comparative study of involuntary and voluntary memorization, but their attempts at a meaningful analysis of the conditions for the difference in the productivity of these two types of memorization were not developed in further studies of foreign psychology.

AT In our studies, we proceeded from the fact that the analysis of the content and structure of the activity that results in involuntary memory, and the analysis of the features of special mnemonic actions that make up the essence of voluntary memory, should act as the main way of their comparative study.

Such a study is of great practical and theoretical importance. It makes it possible to establish the general and the different in voluntary and involuntary memorization under the conditions of their productivity, to determine the place and significance of both types of memorization in the student's educational work. The formation of these two types of memorization is the main content of the development of memory, therefore, studying the nature of the differences and relationships between them will make it possible to give a meaningful description of memory at different stages of its development.

AT In the third part of the book, we set ourselves the task of highlighting the results of a comparative study of involuntary and voluntary memorization, carried out by us on different material, in different ways of working on it, and on the basis of the data of this study to raise some questions related to the practice and theory of memory.

Involuntary memorization, which will be compared with voluntary memorization in what follows, was studied by us mainly within the performance of various kinds of cognitive tasks. Therefore, we will look for the reasons for the differences in the features and conditions of productivity of both types of memorization, on the one hand, and in the content and nature of the performance of a certain cognitive task in which involuntary memorization is carried out, on the other hand, in the features of the content and performance of mnemonic

tasks. Cognitive activity is the leading, although not exhaustive, area of ​​functioning of involuntary and voluntary memorization. Therefore, we believe that a comparative study of these types of memory within this kind of activity should lead to the establishment of not only important, but also the basic laws of involuntary and voluntary memorization.

Almost all studies of involuntary memorization were carried out by us in terms of comparing it with voluntary memorization. In the second part of the book, we presented only the facts relating to the characteristics of involuntary memorization. In this section, in a number of cases we will use the same facts, but in terms of comparing them with the facts of arbitrary memorization. Comparative analysis will help to expand and deepen the characteristics of involuntary memorization and highlight new features of voluntary memorization.

AT In this chapter, we will consider data from a comparative study of involuntary and voluntary memorization, obtained on semantic but incoherent material, such as images of individual objects, individual numbers, words, and so on.

AT In our first study (1939), in addition to the two series of experiments on involuntary memorization described in Chapter III, two series of experiments on voluntary memorization were carried out. Let us recall the method of the first series for involuntary memorization, with which we will compare experiments with voluntary memorization. The experimenter conditionally designated on

table space for the "kitchen", "garden", "children's room" and "courtyard" and offered the subjects to arrange the pictures in these places according to the objects depicted on them. There were 15 pictures in total, 12 of them were easily divided into the indicated four groups, and the subjects were asked to put three pictures that were not related to each other in content into a separate group as “superfluous”. In order to make this task accessible to preschoolers as well, the experiment with them was carried out not in the form of completing a classification task, but in the form of a game of putting pictures in these places. The objects depicted in the pictures were also familiar to them (primus stove, apple, ball, dog, etc.). After unfolding, the pictures were removed and the subjects were asked to recall the depicted objects.

In two series for arbitrary memorization, the subjects were given a different set of 15 pictures. Of these, 12 pictures could also easily be classified into four groups of three pictures each: 1) vehicles - bus, tram, steam locomotive; 2) vegetables - carrots, cucumbers, radishes; 3) animals - hare, mouse, hedgehog; 4) clothes - dress, panties, gloves. The last three pictures (as in the experiments on involuntary memorization) were not related to each other in content: balloons, a cup, a broom.

The sets of pictures used in experiments on involuntary and voluntary memorization were equivalent both in the nature of the objects depicted on them and in the possibilities of their classification. The control experiments showed that the differences obtained in the experiments on involuntary and voluntary memorization were determined not by the set of pictures, but by the characteristics of the tasks that the subjects performed with them.

AT In both experiments on arbitrary memorization, the subjects were given the task of remembering as many pictures as possible. In one experiment, the means of memorization was the arrangement of pictures into five groups: pictures related in content were collected in four groups, and different ones in the fifth. Depending on the age of the subjects, the experimental conditions were explained in more or less detail. Where it was necessary, the instruction was illustrated with examples in other pictures.

The experiment was carried out as follows. After the instructions, all the pictures laid out on the table were immediately presented, without observing the classification groups. The subject had to identify these groups. Then the experimenter collected the pictures and the subject sorted them into groups. During the experiment, the experimenter reminded that the pictures should be memorized.

AT in another experiment, the task was also to memorize, but the means of memorization were not specifically indicated; In order to make the second experiment as equal as possible with respect to the exposure time of the pictures with the first experiment, the subject was first shown all the pictures, and then he himself laid them out on the table. In both series, as in the experiment

with involuntary memorization, the pictures at the second presentation, as they were laid out on the table, were all the time in the field of view of the subject.

AT In the following presentation, we will call the two described experiments on arbitrary memorization as follows: an experiment using classification - the 2nd series, and the experiment without the use of classification - the 3rd series.

To verify the results obtained in individual experiments, group experiments were carried out.

In the 2nd series, pictures fixed on a special shield were shown to a group of subjects all at once. The subjects marked the classification groups and wrote down the names of these groups (transport, animals, etc.) on their sheets. Presenting the pictures one at a time for the second time, the experimenter called the serial number of each picture, and the subjects wrote down this number in the group where, in their opinion, this picture should be assigned. For example, if the picture "locomotive" was presented third in order, then the number "three" was recorded in the group "transport", etc. During playback, the subjects wrote down pictures on their sheets in any order.

In the 3rd series, the pictures were also presented twice - first all at once, and then one at a time. In this case, fixing the order of presentation of pictures was not carried out.

Table 14. Number and age composition of subjects in individual and group experiments

On the table 14 shows the number and age composition of the subjects covered by individual and group experiments.

The general results of involuntary and voluntary memorization of pictures are presented in Table. fifteen.

Table 15. Indicators of involuntary and voluntary memorization of pictures (in arithmetic mean)

We did not obtain absolute similarity in the results of individual and group experiments. This was hard to expect, since with all our attempts to equalize the experimental conditions as much as possible, we could not do this completely. At the same time, the main trends in the results of memorization in both cases remain: the lag of the 3rd series from the first two, age differences, etc. Due to the fact that the conditions for conducting individual experiments were better controlled than group ones, we consider the data of the first to be more reliable. We will mainly analyze these data.

The main thing that distinguished our experiments was the nature of the tasks, which determined the characteristics of the activity of the subjects during their performance. In the 1st series, the task was cognitive, not mnemonic in nature. In the 2nd and 3rd

In the series there was the same mnemonic task, but the methods of its implementation were different: in the 2nd series, the subjects were prompted by such a memorization tool as classification, in the 3rd series, the subjects memorized as best they could.

Let us compare, first of all, the results of involuntary memorization and voluntary memorization without the use of classification.

Rice. 13. Comparative curves of involuntary and voluntary memorization of pictures

for the 1st and 3rd series of experiments

On fig. 13, which shows the memorization curves for series 1 and 3, reveals a clear advantage of involuntary memorization over voluntary memorization in all groups of our subjects. What explains this advantage?

With involuntary memorization, the subjects, classifying the objects depicted in the pictures, combined them into groups according to meaningful semantic connections. In arbitrary memorization, such semantic

processing of objects was not determined by the instruction of the experiment. This reduced the results of memorization, despite the fact that the subjects tried to memorize.

We are convinced that our explanation is correct by the following facts: where schoolchildren, and especially students, on their own initiative used the classification of pictures and in the third experiment on arbitrary memorization, which revealed itself in a certain grouping of pictures during playback, there memorization usually increased. The possibilities of using the classification and manifestations of one's own initiative in this gradually increased with age. Therefore, the advantage of involuntary memorization over voluntary memorization gradually decreases with increasing age of our subjects.

This is clearly seen from the data in Table. sixteen.

We see that the advantage of involuntary memorization over voluntary memorization in average preschoolers reaches 45%, then it gradually decreases to 15% in adults.

Thus, a comparison of the data of the 1st and 3rd series indicates that in cases where the involuntary memorization of certain material is the result of a meaningful active mental activity, it turns out to be more productive than an arbitrary one that is not based on the same meaningful processing. material.

Table 16. The ratio of indicators of involuntary memorization (1st series) to indicators of arbitrary (3rd series), taken as 100%

Under these conditions, the memorization mindset itself, which is not based on effective methods of its implementation, yields less results than active meaningful work on the material in the absence of such a mindset.

This proposition was also vividly expressed in one of Smirnov's studies (1945). In one experiment, subjects were asked to write 10–15 words from dictation, ostensibly with the aim of studying their handwriting; in another experiment, the subjects read the same number of words and were asked, after each word, to say aloud any word that came to mind; in the third experiment, the subjects had to respond to each word called by the experimenter, not by any word, but related to it in meaning. In all three cases memorization of words was involuntary. In addition, the usual experiment was carried out for arbitrary memorization of the same number and the same degree of difficulty of words.

At the same time, no instructions were given to the subjects regarding the use of any methods of memorization.

Involuntary memorization turned out to be more productive than voluntary memorization in the third experiment, where the subjects established meaningful connections between words and showed greater mental activity.

In another series of experiments, the subjects were asked to read twice six phrases typed on a typewriter and say whether there were errors in them and how many of them (when reprinting five of them, spelling errors were deliberately made). In another experiment, subjects were asked to read six phrases twice and answer whether the phrases were correct in meaning. Then, unexpectedly, the subjects were asked to reproduce phrases. The results of these experiments were compared with the results of arbitrary memorization of the same number of phrases similar in difficulty.

Here, too, involuntary memorization turned out to be more productive than voluntary memorization. In those cases where involuntary memorization was more productive than voluntary, it turned out, as the results of delayed recall showed, to be more durable.

The described facts are, first of all, of great practical importance. In psychology, the idea of ​​involuntary memory as random memory, which does not have its own regularities, has been established. The attention of memory researchers was drawn almost exclusively to the study of voluntary memorization. This largely determined the pedagogy of memory: it was believed that the consolidation of knowledge is carried out almost exclusively through arbitrary memorization and memorization. Meanwhile

it turns out that involuntary memorization under certain conditions can be more productive than arbitrary. This provision poses a new problem for the pedagogy of memory: the problem of the relationship between involuntary and voluntary memory in the educational activity of students, in the assimilation and consolidation of knowledge by them.

We will deal specifically with questions related to this problem in Chapter XI.

The position in question is also of great theoretical importance. It also opens up a new area in the history of memory - the area of ​​relationships, differences and connections between the two main genetic stages in its development - involuntary and voluntary memory.

In the data presented in our study, as in Smirnov's experiments, the role of active, meaningful ways of working on material in involuntary memorization was compared with the effect of less active and meaningful ways of working on material in voluntary memorization. Under these conditions, involuntary memorization turned out to be more productive than voluntary memorization.

Even more important is the comparison of the data of the 1st and 2nd series of our experiments. In this case, involuntary and voluntary memorization is compared under conditions of the same way of working on the material - the classification of pictures. In the first series, classification acted as a way to achieve a cognitive goal, in the second, as a way to achieve a mnemonic goal.

Different goals - this is what, first of all, distinguishes involuntary memorization from arbitrary. Therefore, in this respect, these two types of memorization cannot be equated. Another thing is in relation to the methods of achieving the goal. It is known that arbitrary memory is characterized by the logical processing of material for the purpose of memorization. As its methods, such techniques as analysis and synthesis, abstraction and generalization, comparison, etc. are usually used. But these methods are at the same time methods of thinking, understanding, comprehending various material. This means that the ways of working on the material are what connects, unites involuntary and arbitrary memorization. At the same time, based on the undoubted differences between cognitive and mnemonic goals, one should think that the use of the same methods to achieve different goals should also differ in a number of features.

We consider the path of comparative study of involuntary and voluntary memorization under conditions the same way of working on the material

the main and most fruitful for clarifying both the differences between them and their regular connection. Firstly, this path makes it possible to identify differences in involuntary and voluntary memorization, depending on the characteristics functioning a certain way of working on the material in one case as a method of cognitive, and in the other - a mnemonic action.

Secondly, it makes it possible, in experiments with subjects of different ages, to reveal the differences between involuntary and voluntary memorization in

depending on the formation of cognitive and mnemonic action. After all, the differences in these two types of memorization cannot remain unchanged at all stages of the child's mental development. A different level of mastery by subjects of different ages in certain ways of working on material to achieve a cognitive and mnemonic goal will also cause changes in the relationship of involuntary and voluntary memorization.

These two tasks were answered by the 1st and 2nd series of our experiments. An analysis of classification as a method of cognitive action in the first experiment and as a method of mnemonic action in the second experiment makes it possible to identify differences in involuntary and voluntary memorization depending on the features of the functioning of the same method in the conditions of achieving different goals - cognitive and mnemonic. On the other hand, the wide age composition of the subjects in these series, from middle preschoolers to adults, makes it possible to trace the general path of the formation of classification both as a cognitive action and as a method of memorization, and in connection with this, the main changes in involuntary and voluntary memorization in the process of their development.

Let us turn to the facts obtained in the 1st and 2nd series of experiments.

On fig. 14 shows the curves of involuntary and voluntary memorization according to the data of the 1st and 2nd series.

The ratio of these curves is different than according to the data of the 1st and 3rd series (see Fig. 13).

Rice. 14. Comparative curves of involuntary and voluntary memorization of pictures

for the 1st and 2nd series of experiments

In this case, we also obtained a different percentage ratio of the productivity of involuntary memorization to voluntary than when comparing the 1st and 3rd series. This is clearly seen in the data in Table. 17.

Table 17. The ratio of indicators of involuntary memorization of pictures (1st series) to indicators of arbitrary memorization with classification (2nd series) and without classification (3rd series). Indicators of arbitrary memorization (2nd and 3rd series) are taken as 100%

In both cases, the common thing is that in the younger subjects, involuntary memorization is much more productive than voluntary. However, when comparing the data of the 1st and 3rd series, involuntary memorization, carried out in the process of classifying pictures, does not lose its advantage over arbitrary memorization, which is not based on the same kind of method of working with material. This advantage only gradually decreases from preschoolers to students (145–115%).

We find more complex dynamics in the ratio of the productivity of both types of memorization under conditions of the same methods of working on the material. In this case, the ratio of productivity changes from the moment at which involuntary memorization reveals its maximum advantage in middle preschoolers, to the moment when this advantage is completely lost among middle schoolers and students (200–94%). It indicates the presence of complex connections and relationships between involuntary and voluntary memorization, and not the same at different stages of their development. They are connected with the peculiarities of the process of mastering cognitive and mnemonic actions by different age groups of our subjects.

To clarify these features, let us turn to the analysis of the activities of the subjects in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd series of experiments.

Classification, as a cognitive action, we also tried to organize in children from 2.5 to 4 years old in the form of a game of laying out pictures in certain places on the table (“kitchen”, “garden”, “children's room” and “yard”). As a rule, we were not able to do this, with the exception of individual cases with children of 4 years of age. Children under 4 years of age, at best, accepted this task only with

external side: they simply laid out the pictures without regard to their content. Moreover, even this unfolding was not brought to an end. The help of the experimenter usually did not lead to positive results. All the children's attention was absorbed by looking at individual pictures, manipulating them. Children of this age memorized an average of 4 pictures. Of course, memorization in these cases was not the result of simple mechanical imprinting. It was the result of the activity that the children showed to the pictures in the process of looking at them, manipulating them, naming them with a word, etc. It is possible that the children memorized more pictures, but they were not yet able to recall them arbitrarily at the request of the experimenter. This was the case with children under 4 years of age.

Most of the children of middle preschool age completed the task of the 1st series, but only with systematic help from the experimenter. A minority of the children, predominantly five years of age, required only a detailed explanation of the task, one or two examples, but later it was carried out, as a rule, independently. True, the children often laid out the pictures according to external signs, and not according to their content. However, the experimenter's instructions in these cases were understood by the children and the errors were corrected. It can be said that children of middle preschool age already coped with this task with the help of the experimenter and performed it with great interest in a game situation.

Older preschoolers understood the task (the content of the game) relatively easily and, as a rule, completed it independently. Less common here were errors in assigning pictures to given groups. However,

the fulfillment of this task required active mental work from them.

For younger students, as trial experiments showed, this task was easily performed not only in the situation of the game of laying out pictures in given places, but also in the form of performing the actual cognitive task of classifying them. Moreover, they coped with this task even in those cases when the classification groups were not given in finished form, but they had to be determined by the subject himself. These children show further improvement of classification as a cognitive action. Mastering this action on the material of this difficulty can be considered completed by the end of this age, i.e. in fourth grade students.

The main thing that in our experiments distinguishes middle school students, and even more so adults, from younger schoolchildren,

is the development of this kind of action. For middle school children and adults, it was carried out quickly on the basis of a fleeting orientation, as it were, often not to one, but to several pictures at once. Applying the classification to the material as it was in our experiments was already too easy a task for these subjects.

The described features of the performance of the task in the 1st series by different age groups of subjects give grounds to single out three main stages in the formation of classification as a cognitive action.

1. The initial stage of mastering the cognitive action. We observed it mainly in middle preschoolers. At this stage, the action cannot yet be carried out independently, it must be organized from the outside in all its links and details.

Classification proceeds in the form of a detailed, detailed action. The assignment of each picture is accompanied by a detailed judgment, often expressed aloud or in a whisper. Here, external visual conditions for the organization and flow of cognitive action are of great importance. Such conditions in our experiments were spatially limited places on the table, on which the children laid out the pictures; ready-made designations of these places (“kitchen”, “garden”, etc.), the possibility of practical unfolding in places. Classification in the form of an internal mental assignment of pictures to certain groups, outlined only in the mind, was still little accessible to subjects of this age.

2. The stage of improvement in mastering the cognitive action. This stage includes older preschoolers. Here classification is carried out as an independent cognitive action. Children themselves combined pictures into groups, established connections between them. However, for older preschoolers, classification is still carried out in the form of an extended action. Each picture requires active orientation, special comprehension. Therefore, the activity of the subjects as a whole continues to take shape, as it were, from separate, particular actions.

3. The stage of complete mastery of cognitive action. This was the mastery of younger schoolchildren, especially towards the end of this age. The action becomes more and more curtailed in its composition, the assignment of pictures to groups occurs quickly. The external conditions of the experience lose their significance completely: the groups of classification are well kept in the mind. At this stage, the classification acted in the form of a generalized principle

action that can be applied to different specific material. This created greater freedom in the application of classification.

Since the mastery of classification as a cognitive action was completed on the material of our experiments already with younger schoolchildren, we did not observe any new qualitative features in the activity of middle schoolchildren, and even more so in adults. One can only note an even greater curtailment of the action, an even greater speed, freedom and ease of its implementation.

Changes in the productivity of involuntary memorization in different age groups are directly related to the stages described above in mastering classification as a cognitive action.

We noted that younger preschoolers could not cope with the task of classifying pictures even when it was carried out in the form of a game. Helping these children did not lead to positive results. Under these conditions, the orientation that arose in children to the pictures, regardless of the game that "did not go", led to memorizing an average of 4 pictures. A sharp increase in memorization up to 9.8 is given by average preschoolers. It is connected with the initial stage of mastering the classification. At the second stage - the stage of improving cognitive action - we no longer observe such a sharp jump in the increase in memorization in older preschoolers, which is found in the transition from complete inability to classify in younger preschoolers to the initial ability in middle preschoolers. Here, the memorization index increases from 9.8 to 11.1. At the third stage

- the stage of complete mastery of the classification - memorization in younger students continues to increase, reaching

13. After complete mastery of classification as a cognitive action, the increase in memorization also ends, in general: in middle school students, in comparison with younger students, memorization increases only from 13 to 13.4. Adults, in comparison with average schoolchildren, even somewhat reduce memorization - from 13.4 to 13.2.

If we take the average memorization index of each previous age group as 100%, then the percentage increase in each subsequent group will be expressed in the following indicators: for middle preschoolers - 240%, for older preschoolers - 115.6%, for younger students

- 116.2%, among secondary schoolchildren - 100.3% and among adults - 98.5%. We see that the greatest increase in involuntary memorization falls on the initial stage of the formation of a cognitive action, the product of which it is. At the second and third stages, the increase in memorization is already less intense. By the end of the third stage, the growth of memorization productivity is basically completed. Moreover, our adult subjects showed a tendency to decrease in memorization compared to average schoolchildren. We can say that this trend is an adequate indicator that this cognitive action in its formation has reached the level of not only skill, but also skill. It begins to lose the character of a specially purposeful action and therefore does not require special mental activity for its implementation. This explains the very tendency to reduce the productivity of memorization.

Of course, we are talking about the completion of the formation of a classification in relation to a material of a certain complexity, such as it was in our experiments.

Undoubtedly, the classification of complex material, difficult even for adults, would again proceed according to the type of active purposeful action. In this case, a tendency to a decrease in memorization could not have manifested itself.

Let us now consider how the process of mastering classification as a way of arbitrary memorization takes place, or otherwise: how is classification formed as a mnemonic action?

Here, too, let us first dwell on the description of the activities of different age groups of subjects in the second series of experiments.

The activities of the middle preschoolers in the 2nd series were similar to the activities of the younger preschoolers in the 1st series of experiments. The task of memorizing cards using grouping them for better memorization was inaccessible to middle preschoolers in the same way as the cognitive task of classifying pictures for younger preschoolers. True, the memorization task itself, without classifying pictures, was accepted by the majority of middle preschoolers. We were convinced of this by watching their activities in the 3rd series. They actively peered at individual pictures, many of them repeated their names aloud or in a whisper; they easily accepted the task of recalling pictures, which indicated that their active perception of pictures and repeated pronunciation of names were also oriented towards this task. We saw this in the 2nd series, but these tricks were not related to classification. The stimulation of the subjects by the experimenter to use classification for the purpose of memorization interfered with the implementation of those simple memorization techniques that they were already capable of. The help of the experimenter led to the fact that they

At best, they were included in the performance of this cognitive task, but then they completely lost the task of memorization. Classification could not be used by middle preschoolers as a way of remembering because it was just beginning to take shape in them as a cognitive action. Therefore, the help of the experimenter could lead to positive results in the formation of the classification only as a cognitive, and not a mnemonic action.

The activity of older preschoolers in the 2nd series proceeded differently. First of all, they better accepted the task of remembering pictures, often showing a keen interest in it and a willingness to perform it. For them, it was a feasible and informative task to classify pictures. However, the use of classification as a means of memorization caused them great difficulties, because classification itself as a cognitive action required from them intense mental activity, special mental efforts. In this regard, it completely absorbed the attention of the subjects, displacing and inhibiting the mnemonic task. Reminding the subjects of the need to memorize the pictures at the time when they were putting them into groups usually led to the fact that they stopped laying them out for a while and looked at the pictures again, repeatedly, trying to remember each of them separately. The activity of the subjects in the experiment was bifurcated all the time, they alternately performed two tasks.

- cognitive and mnemonic. When they classified the pictures, at that time they seemed to forget to memorize, but when, after the experimenter's reminders, they tried to memorize, they stopped

classify. Only in individual seven-year-old children was the task of remembering kept. But even in these cases, the bifurcation of activity remained: laying out the pictures was interspersed with their repeated viewing.

Thus, older preschoolers, coping with the classification of pictures, could not yet subordinate it to the mnemonic task. This task was carried out by a more accessible means for them - simple repetition. However, it is important to note that the subjects of this age, especially children from 6 to 7 years old, understood and accepted the task of the 2nd series, i.e. that you need to lay out the pictures in order to better remember them. They actively tried to do this, but ran into the difficulties mentioned above. The fact that this task was understood and accepted by subjects of this age is also evidenced by the fact that many of them used the classification during reproduction. Moreover, in some cases this use was quite conscious, the children, as it were, planned their recollection: “Now I will remember which pictures I put here, “in the kitchen,” and then which ones in other places.”

So, older preschoolers accepted the task of using classification for the purpose of memorization, tried to carry it out, but the level of mastery of classification as a cognitive action was still insufficient to subordinate it to mnemonic goals.

Among schoolchildren in the second grade, we observed still serious difficulties in using classification for the purpose of memorization. To an even greater extent, they were characteristic of first-graders, as we were convinced in another study conducted later on this method, but for other purposes (we will talk about the results of this study in chapter XI of the book). These difficulties were caused

The fact that even among schoolchildren of grades I-II the performance of classification as a cognitive action continued to require special mental activity, it continued to be of a rather developed character.

Pupils in the 3rd and even more so in the 4th grades completely mastered classification as a cognitive action and could use it as a method of memorization. In them, as a rule, we did not observe a bifurcation of activity into cognitive and mnemonic, the classification was clearly subordinated to the mnemonic purpose. Reproduction of pictures was always carried out in groups. The use of classification for the purpose of memorization no longer required such mental effort, intense attention, as for schoolchildren in grades I and II. After the end of the classification, the subjects usually examined the pictures, and not each one individually, but formed groups of them. The process of arbitrary memorization with the use of classification proceeded faster; mnemic action began to be reduced, generalized and acquire relative freedom in its implementation.

In middle school age, the process of mastering the classification as a way of arbitrary memorization was completed. The application of classification for the purpose of memorization not only did not cause difficulties, it was carried out quickly, freely, easily. When all the pictures were shown for the first time, the subjects quickly identified all the groups into which they should be assigned. Upon repeated presentation, the pictures were arranged into groups, often not one at a time, but several at once.

In adult subjects, we did not observe any significant differences in activity compared with average schoolchildren, except for even greater freedom and

ease of use of classification for memorization purposes.

The described features of the activity of subjects of different ages in the second series of experiments give grounds to distinguish three stages in the formation of classification as a mnemonic action, similar to those outlined by us in the formation of classification as a cognitive action.

We can speak about the initial stage of the formation of a mnemonic action under the conditions of the 2nd series of our experiments only in relation to older preschoolers. In these subjects, we noted the understanding of the task, the readiness to perform it, the presence of an already relatively formed ability to classify for cognitive purposes, and finally, the initial attempts to apply classification for mnemonic purposes. The main features of this stage are extreme detail, expansion, low generalization of the mnemonic action, and in connection with this, great difficulties in its implementation.

The second stage - the stage of improving the mnemonic action - covers younger students. The main features of this stage, which appear with sufficient obviousness only at the end of it, are: the coming reduction, generalization and relative freedom in the implementation of the mnemonic action.

The third stage, which we observed at the end of middle school age, is characterized by complete mastery of classification as a mnemonic action. Here it acquired the character of a folded, generalized action and, because of this, freedom and ease in its implementation. Adults can talk about

turning this skill into a kind of mnemonic skill.

Changes in the productivity of voluntary memorization in subjects of different ages in the second series of experiments are naturally associated with the three stages of mastering classification as a mnemonic action.

In middle preschoolers, we could not organize voluntary memorization using classification, even in its very initial form. Under these conditions, the children memorized an average of 4.8 pictures. We obtained a sharp increase in memorization from 4.8 to 8.7 in older preschoolers at the initial stage of mastering mnemonic actions. In the future, memorization continues to increase, but not in such a sharp form: at the second stage, for younger students, it increases from 8.7 to 12.4, and at the third stage, for middle schoolers, from 12.4 to 14.3. After the completion of mastering the mnemonic action, we not only did not receive a further increase in memorization in adult subjects, but, on the contrary, found its slight decrease - from 14.3 to 14.1.

If here we take the average memorization index of each previous age group as 100%, then the percentage increase in each subsequent group will be expressed in the following indicators: for average preschoolers - 180.1%, for junior schoolchildren - 142.5%, for secondary schoolchildren - 115.3% and in adults - 98.6%. We see that the greatest increase in voluntary memorization, as well as involuntary, falls on the first stage of formation, but now not of a cognitive, but of a mnemonic action. At the second and third stages, the increase in memorization is already less

intensive. By the end of the third stage, the growth of memorization productivity is basically completed.

In the process of forming a classification as a cognitive and mnemonic action, a certain connection and dependence of the mnemonic action on the cognitive one is revealed. The mnemonic action goes through the same main stages as the cognitive one, but it goes through them after the cognitive action, lagging behind it all the time, as it were, by one step. A cognitive action, being formed, prepares the necessary conditions for the formation of a mnemonic action.

The initial age group of the subjects in our experiments were younger preschoolers. Here we could not organize the classification of pictures, despite the fact that the experiments were carried out in a game situation and with the help of the experimenter. We found the initial stage in the formation of cognitive action in middle preschoolers. However, its use as a method of mnemonic action turned out to be impossible because the action itself was just beginning to take shape. A prerequisite for the initial use of a cognitive action for the purpose of memorization is a certain level of its development. Such development occurs at the second stage of its formation. Because of this, the first stage of mnemonic action begins with the second stage of the formation of cognitive action in middle preschoolers. However, the implementation of the mnemonic

action at the first stage of its formation causes even greater difficulties, since the cognitive action itself is still expanded, detailed, not generalized. It has a pronounced cognitive orientation, requiring active, focused attention from the subjects. The ensuing curtailment, generalization, some automation of the cognitive action at the third stage of its formation in younger students create the necessary freedom in using it as a method of mnemonic action. This characterizes the second stage in its formation. Finally, at the third stage, the mnemonic action itself in older schoolchildren reaches a high level of generalization, becomes curtailed and acquires complete freedom in its implementation.

The sequence of stages in the formation of cognitive and mnemonic actions is presented in Table. 18. Data are also presented on the rate of increase in the productivity of involuntary and voluntary memorization, where the memorization rate of each subsequent age group is given as a percentage relative to the previous group.

We see that the greatest increase in both types of memorization falls on the first stage of the formation of both cognitive and mnemonic actions.

Table 18 The indicators of each subsequent age group are given as a percentage of the indicators of the previous group, taken as 100%

With the completion of the formation of these actions at the third stage, the productivity of memorization does not increase in the future.

The natural connection and dependence of the formation of a mnemonic action on the cognitive one also generates a regular dynamics in the ratio of the productivity of involuntary and voluntary memorization at different stages of their development. This dynamics is presented in Table. eighteen.

Middle preschoolers are at the first stage of the formation of classification as a cognitive

actions and at the zero, if I may say so, stage of the formation of a mnemonic action. Under these conditions, the advantage of involuntary memorization over voluntary memorization is especially significant, and it is expressed in 200%.

Older preschoolers are at the second stage of the formation of cognitive and at the first stage of mnemonic action. Under these conditions, the advantage of involuntary memorization over arbitrary is still significant - 126%.

For younger students, the third stage of cognitive action is correlated with the second stage of mnemonic action. Under these conditions, an insignificant advantage of involuntary memorization over arbitrary (105%) is still preserved.

Finally, in middle school children and in adults, cognitive and mnemonic actions are correlated in both cases at the third stage of their formation. Only under these conditions does a change occur in the ratio of memorization productivity: voluntary memorization becomes more productive.

After a comparative analysis of the data of the 1st and 2nd series, the data of the comparative analysis of the 1st and 3rd series become even clearer.

What explains the differences in the relationship between the productivity of involuntary memorization and voluntary memorization in series 1 and 3? The differences in question stand out clearly when comparing the curves presented in Figures 13, 14 and 15 (pp. 253, 257, 270), as well as the data in Table. 17 (p. 258).

Rice. 15. Comparative curves of arbitrary memorization for the 2nd and 3rd series of experiments

Involuntary memorization retained its advantage in productivity in all our subjects, from middle preschoolers to adults, only with respect to voluntary memorization in Series 3. It is explained by the inequality of methods of working on the material: involuntary memorization was based on classification, while the choice of methods of voluntary memorization was presented by the subjects themselves. These methods undoubtedly improved with age, so the advantage of involuntary memorization gradually became less and less. Characteristically, from the very beginning, in middle preschoolers, this advantage turns out to be much smaller compared to what it is when comparing the data of the 1st and 2nd series. This is explained by the fact that in the 3rd series these subjects memorized as best they could, in the 2nd series the classification, with complete inability to use it, prevented them from using the methods available to them. Therefore, in the 3rd series they remembered better than in the 2nd.

A completely different picture of the relationship between involuntary and voluntary memorization in the 1st and 2nd

series. From the very beginning, in middle preschoolers, the advantage of involuntary memorization is very large (200%) due to the complete inability of these subjects to use classification for memorization. But already in older preschoolers, this advantage drops sharply - from 200 to 126%, and in younger students - to 105%, due to the fact that in arbitrary memorization, the subjects use classification to a greater or lesser extent.

Complete mastery of classification as a mnemonic means and leads to the fact that now arbitrary memorization becomes more productive than involuntary.

This means that with the same methods of working on the material, arbitrary memorization, provided that these methods are fully mastered, is more productive than involuntary. Only under these conditions does a specifically mnemonic orientation play a decisive role in the use of certain methods of working on material.

In the three series of our experiments, voluntary memorization in the 2nd series turned out to be the most productive. It turned out to be more productive than involuntary memorization in the 1st series, because it is arbitrary. It turned out to be more productive than random memorization in series 3, because it relied on such a meaningful tool as classification (see.

However, it did not become more productive immediately, but only at a certain stage of its formation as a complex mnemonic action. Compared with involuntary, it has become more productive only in middle school students. Compared to arbitrary

memorization in the 3rd series, it becomes more productive already in older preschoolers, and its advantage in the future turns out to be much greater, since in the 3rd series memorization was not based on classification

(see fig. 15).

Rice. 16. Comparative curves of involuntary and voluntary memorization for the 1st, 2nd and 3rd series within each age group of subjects

Thus, the most productive in our experiments was voluntary memorization in the 2nd series, based on classification. However, it turned out to be the most difficult to master. Therefore, it goes through the most difficult path in its formation. This path is shown graphically in Fig. sixteen.

At middle preschoolers arbitrary memorization during Series 2 is the least productive.

At older preschoolers, it lags far behind involuntary memorization, but is already beginning to overtake voluntary memorization, as it was in 3rd series.

In younger students, it catches up with involuntary memorization. Finally, in middle school students it becomes the most productive.

Let us summarize the results of a comparative study of involuntary memorization obtained by us in this study.

1. Involuntary memorization when compared with an arbitrary one at the initial stages of the formation of the latter is more productive.

2. Involuntary memorization is more productive than arbitrary in conditions when it is based on more meaningful ways of working with material than arbitrary.

3. Under conditions of identical methods of working with material, involuntary memorization retains its advantage until the cognitive action underlying it is fully mastered as a method of mnemonic action.

4. In the formation of cognitive and mnemonic actions, three stages common to them can be distinguished: the initial stage, the stage of improving actions and the stage of complete mastery of them.

5. Between the stages of the formation of cognitive and mnemonic actions, there is a natural connection and dependence. The mnemonic action is formed on the basis of the cognitive one: the more complete mastery of the latter prepares the necessary ground and conditions for the more complete mastery of the cognitive action as a method of mnemonic action. In this regard, the mnemonic action in its formation

naturally lags behind the formation of cognitive action by one stage.

The provisions listed in paragraphs 1 and 2 of our conclusions follow from the facts not only of this study, but also the facts obtained later in the studies of our and other authors; they can be considered firmly established and proven.

With regard to the provisions listed in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5, which are especially important for characterizing the relationship between involuntary and voluntary memorization in the process of their formation, the question arises: do they have a general meaning, or are they explained only by the conditions of the experiments of this study?

The answer to this question will be given below.

The provisions formulated above required verification on other material, with other methods of working with them, on other cognitive and mnemonic tasks. Such a test was carried out by us as an additional task in one study devoted to the study of the influence of motives on involuntary memorization, described in chapter VI. The results of this study, relating to the characterization of the influence of modes of activity on involuntary memorization, are also set forth in Chapter V. The methodology of experiments on involuntary memorization is also described in detail there, so here we will confine ourselves to only a brief reminder of it.

The tested schoolchildren of II, V grades and students were asked to come up with a word for each of the 15 given words.

your word. The invented words in three series of experiments had to be associated with the proposed words in different ways (inventing the words "by connection", "by properties" and "by the initial letter"). The fulfillment of these tasks was motivated for schoolchildren of grades II and V by testing their ability to think correctly, for students by the need to collect material to characterize the processes of thinking.

AT In three series of experiments on voluntary memorization of 15 similar words, we offered the subjects, in order to better memorize, each word also to be associated with the word they invented in one series - "by connections", in the other - "by properties" and in the third - "by the initial letter".

This design of the experiments was due to the purpose of this study. First, we wanted to compare the productivity of involuntary and voluntary memorization on other material under the same conditions of working on it. Secondly, to trace how the ratio of the productivity of involuntary and voluntary memorization will change with three ways of linking words that required different mental and mnemonic activity from the subjects. Thirdly, we set ourselves the task of testing the previously obtained regularities in the formation of cognitive and mnemonic actions on other, similar, but varying degrees of complexity, actions. Each series of experiments involved 15–20 subjects of each age group.

AT Further, only the results of reproducing the given words will be analyzed, since they were the same for all subjects. The results obtained are presented in table. nineteen.

Table 19. Indicators of involuntary and voluntary memorization of words in three series of experiments

(in arithmetic mean)

The reasons for the differences in the productivity of involuntary memorization in the three series of our experiments were clarified in detail in Chapter V. They are due to the peculiarities of the three ways of linking words, which required from our subjects different degrees of activity and content of thought processes.

This pattern is also manifested in voluntary memorization: here the 1st series turned out to be the most productive, and the 3rd series was the least productive.

Rice. 17. Curves of involuntary and voluntary memorization of words for the 1st, 2nd and 3rd series of experiments

Differences in the productivity of the series are more pronounced in involuntary memorization. This is clearly seen in Fig. 17, which graphically presents the data of table. 19. The dilution of the curves in involuntary memorization is much greater than in voluntary, especially between curves 1 and 2, on the one hand, and curve 3 of the series, on the other.

Consequently, the advantage of meaningful, semantic connections between words in comparison with little meaningful, external connections is especially found in involuntary memorization.

Rice. 18. The ratio of indicators of involuntary and voluntary memorization for the 1st and 2nd series to the indicators of the 3rd series, taken as 100%

In voluntary memorization, older subjects also use these external connections quite effectively. On fig. 18 shows the ratio of indicators of involuntary and voluntary memorization of the 1st and 2nd series to the indicators of the 3rd series, taken as 100%.

A significant decrease in the advantage of the 1st and 2nd series over the 3rd in voluntary memorization compared to how it is expressed in involuntary, is largely due to the fact that external connections between words were also used quite effectively in voluntary memorization. This fact testifies, on the one hand, to the special significance of meaningful connections for involuntary memorization (which we have already discussed in detail in Chapter V) and, on the other hand, to the specific features of the mnemonic action, which, in contrast to the cognitive action, makes it possible to productively use not only semantic, internal connections between objects, but also external connections.

Let us turn to the differences that interest us in this chapter in relation to the productivity of involuntary and voluntary memorization and to an analysis of the reasons that determine these differences. In this regard, the data in Table 20.

Table 20. The ratio of indicators of involuntary memorization of words to indicators of arbitrary memorization, taken as 100%

In these data, the following facts deserve attention: firstly, the pronounced advantage of involuntary memorization over voluntary memorization in schoolchildren of the 2nd grade in the 1st and 2nd series of experiments (195% and 152%); secondly, a significant decrease in this advantage among schoolchildren of the 5th grade in the same series (117% and 116%); thirdly, the loss of this advantage in the same series among students (87% and 88%); finally, fourthly, the absence of the advantage of involuntary memorization over voluntary in the 3rd series in schoolchildren of the 2nd grade (100%) and a significant advantage of voluntary memorization over involuntary in the same series in schoolchildren of the 5th grade and students: the indicators of involuntary memorization are only 76 % y

schoolchildren of the 5th grade and 64% - among students in relation to the indicators of arbitrary memorization.

Thus, in this study, we also obtained a certain dynamics in the ratio of the productivity of involuntary and voluntary memorization (see Fig.

Rice. 19. Curves of involuntary and voluntary memorization of words for the 1st, 2nd and 3rd series

In these experiments, the subjects dealt with three types of connections between words, which required them to use more or less complex mental actions. In this regard, we also obtained different dynamics in the ratio of involuntary and voluntary memorization. However, despite the fact that the specific expression of this dynamics is different in different series, the general trends in it are similar, since the causes that determine it are the same. They are associated with the peculiarities of the formation of cognitive and mnemonic actions and with those connections and dependencies

between them, which were found in the experiments with the classification of pictures, which we described above.

To confirm this, let us turn to an analysis of the activities of subjects of different ages in different series of our experiments. Let us first dwell on a comparative analysis of both types of memorization in schoolchildren of the second grade.

How can one explain the decrease in the productivity of voluntary memorization compared to involuntary memorization by almost two times in the 1st series and by one and a half times in the 2nd series?

The differences in the conditions of the experiments consisted only in the fact that during involuntary memorization, the subjects performed a cognitive task, and during voluntary memorization, a mnemonic one. These features determined the different nature of the activity of the subjects. Associated with this are differences in the productivity of involuntary and voluntary memorization.

In experiments on involuntary memorization, the activity of schoolchildren in the second grade proceeded outwardly calmly, distinguished by composure, and a single focus on the content of the tasks being performed. In experiments on voluntary memorization, however, it was characterized by unbalance and duality. In spite of the strongly pronounced orientation toward memorization at the beginning of the experiment, the subjects, having begun to invent words, soon seemed to forget that they must at the same time memorize the words presented by the experimenter. Their minds were completely absorbed in the very act of inventing words. During the course of the experiment, the experimenter had to remind the subjects several times of the need to memorize the words. Without these reminders, even in this case we would have to deal rather with

involuntary memory than with voluntary. Reminders resulted in subjects repeating the preceding word in a whisper or to themselves. However, in the course of the experiment, they were forced to stop repeating and come up with another word again. This circumstance caused a picture of imbalance, split in their activities.

Thus, in second-grade schoolchildren, inventing words still continued to act as an independent action and could not be a means of voluntary memorization. They were forced to carry out two actions simultaneously: to invent and memorize words. Under these conditions, the orientation toward memorization could not be realized sufficiently. Because of this, meaningful connections between words, established in the process of inventing words, were not used for the purpose of memorization; this kind of effective method of memorization was often replaced by a simple repetition of pairs of words.

In itself, inventing the words "by connections", as well as "by properties", did not cause any difficulties for schoolchildren of the second grade. It was accessible under certain conditions, as shown by our experiments, and older preschoolers. This is also evidenced by the relatively high productivity of involuntary memorization when children of this age perform cognitive tasks, where the inventing of words acted as an independent, cognitive action. But in order for these mental processes to act as a way of remembering, a higher level of mastering them is necessary. Only under these conditions can the mindfulness orientation realize its advantage associated with the establishment of meaningful semantic

connections between words before in such a way that simple repetition is.

So, almost a twofold decrease in the productivity of voluntary memorization in comparison with involuntary memorization in schoolchildren of the second grade arose for the following reason: a cognitive action aimed at establishing semantic connections between words could not yet sufficiently fulfill the function of a method of memorization due to the insufficient level of mastery of this action.

It is natural to expect that in the future such actions will be improved, as a result of which it will be possible to use them as a method of memorization, which will lead to an increase in the productivity of voluntary memorization, and thereby to a change in its relationship with involuntary memorization. In order to confirm the presence of such a tendency, we conducted experiments on the same material with pupils of the 5th grade and with students.

Schoolchildren of the 5th grade in the 1st and 2nd series, i.e. where the most meaningful connections between words were established, voluntary memorization continued to be less productive than involuntary (see Fig. 19). But the fact that the advantage of involuntary memorization over voluntary in these subjects is sharply reduced compared to what we have in schoolchildren of the second grade (in the 1st series - from 195% to 117% and in the 2nd series - from 152% to 116%), indicates that the level of mastery of the action to establish meaningful connections among schoolchildren of the 5th grade has risen sharply and, at the same time, there has been a possibility of using this action as a way of arbitrary memorization.

We are convinced of this not only by the quantitative indicators of memorization, but also by the changed nature of the activity of these schoolchildren. Here we did not observe manifestations of imbalance, duality of activity in such a vivid form, as was the case with schoolchildren of the second grade. We no longer had to remind the subjects of the need to memorize words. If among schoolchildren of the second grade we did not have a single case when the subject could remember more words with voluntary memorization than with involuntary memorization, then among schoolchildren of the fifth grade we already had separate cases when the subject reproduced more words with voluntary memorization than with involuntary memorization. . However, there were few such cases, so the average indicators of voluntary memorization were here also somewhat lower than those of involuntary.

We obtained a high level of mastery of the most perfect method of memorization among students, although the turning point in this regard undoubtedly occurs much earlier. We carried out experiments with individual schoolchildren of the 6th-7th grades and discovered this fact with complete clarity.

It is not difficult to grasp the fundamental similarity in the formation of cognitive and mnemonic actions in our subjects in this study in comparison with the picture that we have described in relation to the formation of actions associated with classification. Here and there, the same three stages of the formation of cognitive action are distinguished: the stage of initial mastery, which we found already in older preschoolers, the stage of improvement (in schoolchildren of the second grade) and the stage of complete mastery (already in schoolchildren of the fifth grade). There are also three stages in the formation

mnemic action with a characteristic lag behind the formation of a cognitive action. The initial stage was found among schoolchildren of the second grade, the stage of improvement was found among schoolchildren of the fifth grade, and, finally, the stage of complete mastery of it was found in the conditions of our experience among students.

The fundamental commonality in the stages of formation of cognitive and mnemonic actions gives rise to a similarity in the dynamics of the ratio of the productivity of involuntary and voluntary memorization in both of our studies. The similarity of the curves in the 1st and 2nd series of experiments of this study (Fig. 19) with the curves of experiments with picture memorization (Fig. 14, p. 257) is not accidental.

We traced the changes in the ratio of the productivity of involuntary memorization according to the data of the 1st and 2nd series of experiments. Fundamentally, the same pattern appears in the indicators of memorization in the 3rd series. However, here we discover a new fact. It lies in the fact that in the 3rd series, voluntary memorization is much earlier than involuntary. While in the 1st and 2nd series it clearly reveals its advantage under the conditions of our experiments only among students, in the 3rd series voluntary memorization reaches the level of involuntary memorization already in schoolchildren of the second grade; in schoolchildren of the 5th grade, and especially in students, it already significantly exceeds the involuntary (see Table 20 and Figure 20).

Rice. 20. Curves of involuntary and voluntary memorization of words in schoolchildren of grades II and V and among students

This is explained by the fact that the establishment of an external connection between words (“by the initial letter”) did not require any complex intellectual operations from our subjects. Therefore, the process of mastering the establishment of such a connection between words, as a way of arbitrary memorization, was greatly facilitated and accelerated.

It is indicative that we find the sharpest dilution in the ratio of the productivity of involuntary and voluntary memorization at the extreme poles of both the series of experiments and the age groups of the subjects. Involuntary memorization reveals its advantage to the greatest extent in the 1st series among schoolchildren of the second grade; the advantage of voluntary memorization over involuntary is greatest in the 3rd series among students.

With on the one hand: more meaningful connections between words in The 1st series, than in the 2nd and 3rd, required more mental activity from schoolchildren of the second grade. This made it difficult to master the establishment of these connections as a way of arbitrary memorization, which led to its sharp decrease. The establishment of these same connections, acting in the form of independent cognitive actions, turned out to be the most productive in involuntary memorization. This explains the fact that it was in the 1st series, and specifically among schoolchildren in the 2nd grade, that involuntary memorization turned out to be almost twice as productive as voluntary memorization.

With on the other hand: external links between words in The 3rd series, in the presence of the mindset and the ability to memorize, also proved to be quite effective. With the help of these connections, students memorized almost three and a half times more than schoolchildren of the second grade (2.8 and 9.4). But in involuntary memorization, the establishment of this kind of connection between words turned out to be the least productive. This explains why voluntary memorization turned out to be one and a half times more productive than involuntary memorization in Series 3 and specifically among students.

Thus, in this study, we also obtained similar dynamics in the ratio of the productivity of involuntary and voluntary memorization compared to

with previous research: at first, involuntary memorization is more productive, and then voluntary. And here this dynamics is determined by the natural lagging behind the formation of a mnemonic action from the formation of a cognitive one. At the same time, the data of this study not only confirmed the regularity noted by us, but also expanded it: voluntary memorization is ahead of involuntary the faster, the faster

less complex, and therefore easier to master, is the cognitive action used as a method of arbitrary memorization (see Fig. 19 and 20).

It is also important to characterize voluntary memorization itself that its productivity varies depending on the degree of difficulty in mastering a certain method of memorization. This position was confirmed in other obtained facts.

We conducted an additional three series of experiments: the subjects were given ready-made pairs of words for memorization, interconnected in the same way as in the three main series for arbitrary memorization (where these connections were established by the subjects themselves in the process of inventing words). Thus, the additional series differed from the main ones only in that they eliminated the moment of independently inventing words. Experiments were carried out with schoolchildren of II and V classes. The results of these experiments are presented in table. 21.

Table 21

We can see that memorization of ready-made pairs of words for schoolchildren of the second grade turned out to be more productive than

memorization in similar series with inventing words. It turned out to be more productive because with the elimination of the moment of independence in establishing connections between words, the mastery of these connections as a way of memorization became much easier. True, with the elimination of the active element of inventing words, the establishment of semantic connections as a means of memorization lost its advantage in many respects. But for schoolchildren of the second grade, the partial loss of this quality of the method of memorization was more than compensated for by greater accessibility in its use.

In grade 5 schoolchildren, memorization of ready-made pairs of words turned out to be less productive than independently formed ones. The high level in mastering the methods of memorization allowed them to use the advantage of inventing words on their own.

Thus, the process of formation of cognitive and mnemic actions, according to our research, goes the following way: from a purposeful, expanded in its composition and not yet generalized action to a shortened, generalized action. This is a common way of turning a goal-directed action into a more or less automated skill. Leontiev wrote the following about it: “As experimental studies show, it is typical for the development of cognitive operations that any conscious operation is first formed as an action and cannot arise otherwise. Conscious operations are first formed as purposeful processes, which only then can

in some cases take the form of intellectual skills” (1945).

However, due to the fact that in our research we traced the formation of cognitive actions and the process of mastering them as methods of mnemonic actions, we were able to reveal a complex picture of connections and dependencies in this formation.

Mnemic action is based on cognitive action. But it is more complex in its structure than the latter: including and preserving the cognitive orientation in the material, at the same time it subordinates this orientation to the mnemonic setting. A certain degree of formation of a cognitive action is a necessary condition for the formation of a mnemonic action. This explains why the mnemonic action lags behind the cognitive one in its formation; it is formed, as it were, following the cognitive action. For the same reason, cognitive action at the initial stage of its formation cannot yet be used as a method of mnemonic action.

At the same time, the fact of the impossibility of combining these actions convincingly indicates the presence of specific features of cognitive and mnemonic goals. In the cognitive action, the activity of the subjects is aimed at identifying certain properties in objects, connections and relationships between them; in mnemonic action, this activity shifts to imprinting. Only in the case when cognitive orientation can be carried out quickly, easily, without requiring independent purposeful action, can it be combined with mnemonic orientation. Then cognitive

action, losing its independence, is subject to mnemonic action and plays the role of a mode of this action. In these cases, cognitive orientation, apparently, is only meant as a necessary initial moment for mnemonic action, while mnemonic orientation is actively realized and controlled. The initial mastery of the cognitive action and its further improvement create conditions under which it becomes possible to subordinate it to the mnemonic action. Under these conditions, the mnemonic action gets the opportunity to be carried out in the form of an independent, purposeful action. Now the mnemonic orientation, relying on the cognitive one, can realize its specific features, determined by the features of the mnemonic goal. In the future, the mnemonic action itself, improving, reaches the degree of formation at which it can proceed relatively easily and freely, acquiring the character of a mnemonic skill or habit.

This complex picture of connections and dependencies between cognitive and mnemonic actions in the process

their formations reflect the facts of our experiments with the classification of pictures and with the establishment of certain connections between words. This complex picture of the relationship between cognitive and mnemonic actions determines the regular correlations in the dynamics of the productivity of involuntary and voluntary memorization.

Let's summarize briefly.

AT In this chapter we have presented data from a comparative study of involuntary and voluntary memorization. This study was carried out under conditions both different and identical for both types of memorization of ways of working on the material.

AT conditions when involuntary memorization is based on meaningful and active methods of work, it is more productive than arbitrary, if the latter is carried out in the worst conditions in this respect. Involuntary memory under conditions of meaningful mental work can lead to better results than arbitrary memory that does not rely sufficiently on rational memorization techniques. The absence or presence of a mnemonic setting in itself does not solve the problem. In memorization, the main thing is how to work on the material. The mnemonic attitude reveals its advantage in memory over the cognitive attitude only when it is realized through rational memorization techniques.

The main place in this chapter was devoted to a comparative study of involuntary and voluntary memorization under conditions of identical methods of work. These conditions are the main and most important for characterizing the relationship between these two types of memorization, since involuntary memorization is carried out mainly in cognitive activity, the methods of which also usually act as the most rational means, methods of voluntary memorization.

A comparative study of involuntary and voluntary memorization made it possible to establish a complex and, in our opinion, the main picture in the ratio of their productivity. This ratio is not constant, but changeable: at first, involuntary memorization is more productive, then, after a certain period of equilibrium, it yields to voluntary memorization, and this happens the sooner, the less complex in their mental operations are the methods of working on the material.

The reasons for such dynamics lie in the complex relationship of emerging cognitive and mnemonic actions. This is evidenced by the described stages of such formation, the natural lag of mnemonic actions from cognitive ones.

The essential features of involuntary and voluntary memorization are that if a certain cognitive activity is necessary for the high productivity of involuntary memorization, then in voluntary memorization such activity can, under certain conditions, not only not help, but interfere with memorization, interfere with the deployment of actual mnemonic activity. This indicates the presence of specific features of the mnemonic attitude and orientation in the material, mnemonic actions in general in comparison with the cognitive attitude and orientation, with cognitive action.

These issues will find their further elucidation in Chapter VIII, where the results of a comparative study of involuntary and voluntary memorization of a text will be presented, as well as in Chapter IX, which is specially devoted to the study of the features of mnemonic and cognitive orientation in the material.