Learning-set performance in normal and brain-injured men.

The performance on a learning-set task of 20 normal and 20 brain-damaged 5s of comparable verbal intelligence was contrasted. An analysis of variance showed that the normals were superior to the brain damaged in improvement over repeated trials of the same problem and over blocks of similar problems. The normals made fewer errors of perseverative type, repetitive type, and made fewer incorrect choices after a rewarded correct choice. In the normal group, commission of the latter 2 errors was related to verbal intelligence, with no such relationship being found for the brain-damaged Ss. An explanation in terms of conceptual functioning is presented.