It didn't make lots of sense to me, either, but I did find a way to do
what I think you asked about.

Note: Your description and your example didn't match very well -- you
talked about a record in which [Field 1] = 7, but the only values you
showed in the example for [Field 1] were 0 or 1.

By "previous" you may have meant the record one earlier in the current
sorting order, or the record that was most recently changed or added. In
either case, you can set up a sorting order by including an indexed
field, and in my following example that field is
[tblStudents].[WhenAdded], representing some date (I'm assuming no
duplicate dates here) by which the list of students can be ordered.

So my Table, called [tblStudents], contains the following records:

tblStudentsID Name  WhenAdded
------------- ----- ---------
2             Jane  9/2/2005
4             Marv  9/6/2005
7             Greg  9/7/2005
8             Sally 9/1/2005

I define a query [Q_PrevStudentDate] as...

  SELECT tblStudents.tblStudentsID, Max(tblStudents_1.WhenAdded)
  AS MaxOfWhenAdded
  FROM tblStudents, tblStudents AS tblStudents_1
  WHERE (((tblStudents_1.WhenAdded)<[tblStudents].[WhenAdded]))
  GROUP BY tblStudents.tblStudentsID, tblStudents.Name,
  tblStudents.WhenAdded;

and when run it produces these records:

MaxOfWhenAdded tblStudentsID
-------------- -------------
9/1/2005       2
9/2/2005       4
9/6/2005       7

If [Q_tblStudents] is defined as ...

  SELECT tblStudents.Name, tblStudents_1.Name AS PreviousStudent
  FROM (tblStudents LEFT JOIN Q_PrevStudentDate
  ON tblStudents.tblStudentsID = Q_PrevStudentDate.tblStudentsID)
  LEFT JOIN tblStudents AS tblStudents_1
  ON Q_PrevStudentDate.MaxOfWhenAdded = tblStudents_1.WhenAdded
  ORDER BY tblStudents.Name;

then running it produces the following list, in which each student's
name is associated with the one ahead of him in line:

Name  PreviousStudent
----  ---------------
Greg  Marv
Jane  Sally
Marv  Jane
Sally

Sally, being first in the list, has no predecessor, which is why I used
a LEFT OUTER JOIN instead of an INNER JOIN in the SQL; otherwise, she
wouldn't have been listed.

Incidentally, besides wondering why you'd want to keep track of things
in this way, I also wonder why you'd want to put the results into a
Table.  That would mean that updating one record could make other
records become invalid.  A Query like the one I showed you here would be
immune to that kind of trouble.

  -- Vincent Johns <vjohns@alumni.caltech.edu>
  Please feel free to quote anything I say here.