Apple.
Fact.
Close your eyes and think about the two.
Which one of these words was easier to visualize in your mind when you read them? The answer is typically apple, or rather any concrete noun. More abstract terms, like “fact,” “truth,” and “reality,” are much more difficult to picture in our heads. The concreteness of a noun also impacts how easily we remember it as well as our ability to provide meaningful associations and context for it (Paivio et al. 1968). This is referred to as the concreteness effect, a term first coined by Canadian psychologist Dr. Allan Paivio over 40 years ago (Paivio 1991). In the time since, many have theorized about the underlying mechanism for this phenomenon and tried to localize its function within the brain.
The first theory that emerged to explain the concreteness effect was put forth by the very same Dr. Paivio. He reasoned that information is stored in our minds primarily as visual or verbal inputs, and that these are two distinct and different cognitive systems. This theory is known as dual coding theory and claims that visual and verbal sources can be called upon to aid in recalling information (Paivio 1991). One could recall information about an apple from a mental picture of an apple (visual) or from the word itself (verbal), however one would struggle to use visual sources to recall “fact” and would only have the verbal sources to draw upon, thus explaining the concreteness effect.
A second explanation for this effect is content availability theory. This states that concrete words are more associable with other words and experiences and thus have more retrieval pathways to access them (Atja et al. 1999). One can recall “apple” by its association with oranges, a school teacher’s desk or the last time you went grocery shopping, while “fact” has fewer associations and contextual support and is thus harder to recall. Context availability theory does not distinguish between independent visual and verbal retrieval methods and argues that the concreteness effect is the result of shortcomings within a single cognitive system.
More recently, technology has allowed us to attempt to localize function within the brain and potentially provide us with more evidence. Event related Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) uses the principle that increased blood flow within the brain is proportionate to increased neuronal activity and can give us an impression of which areas are at play when one is presented with different stimuli (Friston et al. 1998). Using fMRI, increased activation has been found in associative and spatial imagery areas for more concrete stimuli. This suggests that a combination of both theories is needed to explain the concreteness effect (Jessen et al. 2000).
Regardless of its underlying mechanism, it is undeniable that the concreteness effect has a role to play in the classroom. If memory and learning are dependent upon context and strongly linked to our ability to form associations with experiences and other ideas, then our pedagogy should reflect this. Emphasis could be placed upon lab work, experimentation and actually doing and experiencing topics in order to provide a more concrete sensory representation than simply reading about something. A shift away from theory and towards application and experiential learning has been suggested and would likely benefit students at many levels (Clark & Paivio 1991). As a student enrolled in a program that focuses on project-based learning like iSci at McMaster University, I cannot help but agree.
Works Cited:
Atja, K.W.K. et al., 1999. Imagery , Context Availability , Contextual Constraint and Abstractness Abstract and Dual-Coding Theory / Imagery.
Clark, J.M. & Paivio, A., 1991. Dual coding theory and education. Educational Psychology Review, 3(3), pp.149–210. Available at: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/BF01320076.
Friston, K.J. et al., 1998. Event-related fMRI: characterizing differential responses. NeuroImage, 7(1), pp.30–40. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9500830.
Jessen, F. et al., 2000. The concreteness effect: evidence for dual coding and context availability. Brain and language, 74(1), pp.103–12. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10924219 [Accessed November 23, 2013].
Paivio, A., 1991. Canadian Journal of Psychology. , 45(3), pp.255–287.
Paivio, A., Yuille, J.C. & Madigan, S.A., 1968. Journal of Experimental Psychology. , 76(1).