学習形式の異同によって遡向抑制の量に差を生ずるかどうかをみようとした。用いた学習形式は次の通りである。視覚的方法(V)…視覚に訴えて学習させ筆答させる。聴覚的方法(A)…聴覚に訴えて学習させ口答させる。原学習と挿入学習とでは,刺戟語として,両学習に共通な二綴の無意味綴を用い,反応語は異なった二桁の数字を用いた。原学習と挿入学習との問には3分,挿入学習と原学習の再学習の間には5分の休息をおいた。被験者は28人であり,すべて大学及び大学院の学生であった。主なる結果は次の通りである。(1)A-Aの場合は,V-A場合よりも,遡向抑制は大きい。しかしV-V,A-Vの間には有意の差は,認められなかった。(2)遡向抑制はA-AにおいてV-Vよりも多かった。(3)同一学習形式の場合,挿入学習におけるリスト内侵入は原学習のそれよりも,著しく減少し,これに反して無応答が増加した。要するに原学習と挿入学習に同一学習形式を用いた場合の遡向抑御は,異なった形式を用いた場合のそれよりも多いか又は同じくらいであった。

The aim of the present investigation was to know whether the amount of retroactive inhibition depends upon the types of learning or not. As for experimental procedure, paired-associates method was used. Stimulus words were two-syllabled nonsense words, and response words were double figures. The interval between the original learning and the interpolatad learning was 3 minutes and that between the interpolated learning was 5 minutes. 28 university students were used as subjects. In the visual type of learning (V), written stimulus word was presented and subject was requested to give the written reply. In the auditory type of learning (A), stimulus word was given verbally and subject was requested to give oral reply. Results were as follows :1. The amount of retroactive inhibition was much less in the type of learning V (original learning)-A (interpolated learning) than in A-A. However, no significant difference was found between A-V and V-V.2 Retroactive inhibition was stronger when both original and interpolated learnings were of the auditory type than when they were both visual type. 3. In the A-A or V-V the number of intra-list intrusion in the interpolated learning was less than in the original one, and the opposite relation was found with the number of blanks. In the A-V or V-A,on regularity could be found.