Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Information Processing”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 1,405 records · Page 78Linked to original sources
PubMed1984

Information processing in reading-disabled and nondisabled children.

Reading disabled and nondisabled children (13-14 years of age) were presented lists of 10 words each at different rates (one word per 1, 2, and 4 sec), and immediately after the last word of each list they recalled the words in any order. Recall of the first few words presented from each list (the primacy effect) was lower in reading-disabled than nondisabled children, and slower presentation rates increased the primacy effect in both groups. These findings suggest that reading-disabled children are not completely failing to use elaborative encoding but are using less effective elaborative encoding than nondisabled readers. With all presentation rates, recall of the last few words (the recency effect) was comparable in both groups, suggesting that older reading-disabled children encode and recognize the stimuli and that elaborative encoding is deficient in reading-disabled in spite of adequate stimulus encoding and recognition.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1985

A cross-sequential analysis of developmental differences in speed of visual information processing.

Development of processing speed was examined in three backward masking studies. The first verified the central nature of backward masking for children aged 8 and 11 years and for adults. The second suggested that task requirements were equivalent for children similar to those in Study 1, and that age differences in performance were not attributable to nonprocessing variables. The main cross-sequential study estimated speed of processing in 80 children (approximately 6 years to 13 years) and young adults using an inspection time task. Target exposure duration was varied to establish the time required to achieve a high level of discriminative accuracy. Estimates of processing speed increased until about 11-13 years of age; beyond this, the trend was less obvious, and it is possible that inspection time asymptotes at around the onset of adolescence. Performance improvement after 1 year could not be explained as resulting from practice since improvement among controls over a period of 2 weeks was significantly less. Correlations between estimates of inspection time made up to 2 years apart found the measure to be reliable.

Adolescent↗