Between-list lag effects in recall depend on retention interval

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Mary A. Pyc (1)
  David A. Balota (1)
  Kathleen B. McDermott (1)
  Tim Tully (2)
  Henry L. Roediger III (1)
  
• 关键词：Memory ; Recall ; Spacing effects ; Lag effects
• 刊名：Memory & Cognition
• 出版年：2014
• 出版时间：August 2014
• 年：2014
• 卷：42
• 期：6
• 页码：965-977
• 全文大小：481 KB
• 参考文献：1. Arnold, K. M., & McDermott, K. B. (2013a). Free recall enhances subsequent learning. / Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20, 507-13. doi:10.3758/s13423-012-0370-3 CrossRef
  2. Arnold, K. M., & McDermott, K. B. (2013b). Test-potentiated learning: Distinguishing between direct and indirect effects of tests. / Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 940-45. doi:10.1037/a0029199
  3. Bahrick, H. P., Bahrick, L. E., Bahrick, A. S., & Bahrick, P. E. (1993). Maintenance of foreign language vocabulary and the spacing effect. / Psychological Science, 4, 316-21. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1993.tb00571.x CrossRef
  4. Balota, D. A., Duchek, J. M., & Paullin, R. (1989). Age-related differences in the impact of spacing, lag and retention interval. / Psychology and Aging, 4, 3-. CrossRef
  5. Balota, D. A., Duchek, J. M., Sergent-Marshall, S. D., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2006). Does expanded retrieval produce benefits over equal-interval spacing? Explorations of spacing effects in healthy aging and early stage Alzheimer’s disease. / Psychology and Aging, 21, 19-1. CrossRef
  6. Bjork, R. A. (1994). Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. In J. Metcalfe & A. Shimamura (Eds.), / Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 185-05). Cambridge: MIT Press.
  7. Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. / Psychological Bulletin, 132, 354-80. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.354 CrossRef
  8. Cepeda, N. J., Vul, E., Rohrer, D., Wixted, J. T., & Pashler, H. (2008). Spacing effect in learning: A temporal ridgeline of optimal retention. / Psychological Science, 19, 1095-102. CrossRef
  9. Crowder, R. G. (1976). / Principles of learning and memory. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
  10. Cull, W. (2000). Untangling the benefits of multiple study opportunities and repeated testing for cued recall. / Applied Cognitive Psychology, 14, 215-35. CrossRef
  11. Delaney, P. F., Verkoeijen, P. P. J. L., & Spirgel, A. (2010). Spacing and testing effects: A deeply critical, lengthy, and at times discursive review of the literature. In B. H. Ross (Ed.), / The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 53, pp. 63-47). San Diego: Academic Press.
  12. Donovan, J. J., & Radosevich, D. J. (1999). A meta-analytic review of the distribution of practice effect: Now you see it, now you don’t. / Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 795-05. CrossRef
  13. Ebbinghaus, H. (1913). / Memory: A contribution to experimental psychology (H. A. Ruger & C. E. Bussenius, Trans.). New York: Columbia University, Teachers College. Original work published 1885.
  14. Glenberg, A. M., & Lehmann, T. S. (1980). Spacing repetitions over 1 week. / Memory & Cognition, 8, 528-38. doi:10.3758/BF03213772 CrossRef
  15. Goverover, Y., Basso, M., Wood, H., Chiaravalloti, N., & DeLuca, J. (2011). Examining the benefits of combining two learning strategies on recall of functional information in persons with multiple sclerosis. / Multiple Sclerosis Journal, 17, 1488-497. CrossRef
  16. Greene, R. L. (2008). Repetition and spacing effects. In H. L. Roediger (Ed.), / Learning and memory: A comprehensive reference (Cognitive psychology of memory, Vol. 2, pp. 65-8). Oxford: Elsevier.
  17. Halamish, V., & Bjork, R. A. (2011). When does testing enhance retention? A distribution-based interpretation of retrieval as a memory modifier. / Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 801-12.
  18. Hartwig, M. K., & Dunlosky, J. (2012). Study strategies of college students: Are self-testing and scheduling related to achievement? / Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 126-34. doi:10.3758/s13423-011-0181-y CrossRef
  19. Izawa, C. (1966). Reinforcement-test sequences in paired-associate learning. / Psychological Reports, 18, 879-19. CrossRef
  20. Karpicke, J. D., & Bauernschmidt, A. (2011). Spaced retrieval: Absolute spacing enhances learning regardless of relative spacing. / Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 1250-257. doi:10.1037/a0023436
  21. Karpicke, J. D., Butler, A. C., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2009). Metacognitive strategies in student learning: Do students practice retrieval when they study on their own? / Memory, 17, 471-79. doi:10.1080/09658210802647009 CrossRef
  22. Kornell, N., & Bjork, R. A. (2007). The promise and perils of self-regulated study. / Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 219-24. doi:10.3758/BF03194055 CrossRef
  23. Kornell, N., Castel, A. D., Eich, T. S., & Bjork, R. A. (2010). Spacing as the friend of both memory and induction in young and older adults. / Psychology and Aging, 25, 498-03. CrossRef
  24. Kornell, N., Bjork, R. A., & Garcia, M. A. (2011). Why tests appear to prevent forgetting: A distribution-based bifurcation model. / Journal of Memory and Language, 65, 85-7. CrossRef
  25. Küpper-Tetzel, C. E., & Erdfelder, E. (2012). Encoding, maintenance, and retrieval processes in the lag effect: A multinomial processing tree analysis. / Memory, 20, 37-7.
  26. Landauer, T. K., & Bjork, R. A. (1978). Optimum rehearsal patterns and name learning. In M. M. Gruneberg, P. E. Morris, & R. N. Sykes (Eds.), / Practical aspects of memory (pp. 625-32). London: Academic Press.
  27. Litman, L. & Davachi, L. (2008). Distributed learning enhances relational memory consolidation. / Learning and Memory, 15, 711-16.
  28. Maddox, G. B., & Balota, D. A. (2012). Self control of when and how much to test face–name pairs in a novel spaced retrieval paradigm: An examination of age-related differences. / Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 19, 620-43. doi:10.1080/13825585.2011.640658 CrossRef
  29. Madigan, S. A. (1969). Intraserial repetition and coding processes in free recall. / Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 8, 828-35. CrossRef
  30. Mason, W., & Suri, S. (2012). Conducting behavioral research on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. / Behavior Research Methods, 44, 1-3. doi:10.3758/s13428-011-0124-6 CrossRef
  31. Melton, A. W. (1967). Repetition and retrieval from memory. / Science, 158, 532. doi:10.1126/science.158.3800.532-b CrossRef
  32. Melton, A. W. (1970). The situation with respect to the spacing of repetitions and memory. / Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 9, 596-06. CrossRef
  33. Peterson, L. R., Wampler, R., Kirkpatrick, M., & Saltzman, D. (1963). Effect of spacing presentations on retention of a paired associate over short intervals. / Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66, 206-09. doi:10.1037/h0046694 CrossRef
  34. Pyc, M. A., & Rawson, K. A. (2009). Testing the retrieval effort hypothesis: Does greater difficulty correctly recalling information lead to higher levels of memory? / Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 437-47. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2009.01.004 CrossRef
  35. Pyc, M. A., Balota, D. A., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2014). / Is There a Benefit of a 24 Hour Spacing Interval? No After a Day, Yes After a Week. Manuscript in preparation.
  36. Rawson, K. A., & Dunlosky, J. (2011). Optimizing schedules of retrieval practice for durable and efficient learning: How much is enough? / Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140, 283-02. doi:10.1037/a0023956 CrossRef
  37. Rawson, K. A., & Kintsch, W. (2005). Rereading effects depend on time of test. / Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 70-0. CrossRef
  38. Robbins, D., & Bush, C. T. (1973). Memory in great apes. / Journal of Experimental Psychology, 97, 344-48. CrossRef
  39. Roediger, H. L., III, & Butler, A. C. (2011). The critical role of retrieval practice in long-term retention. / Trends in Cognitive Science, 15, 20-7. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2010.09.003 CrossRef
  40. Roediger, H. L., III, & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). Test-enhanced learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term retention. / Psychological Science, 17, 249-55. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x CrossRef
  41. Sargis, E. G., Skitka, L. J., & McKeever, W. (2013). The Internet as psychological laboratory revisited: Best practices, challenges, and solutions. In Y. Amichai-Hamburger (Ed.), / The social net: Understanding our online behavior (2nd ed., pp. 253-70). Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossRef
  42. Simone, P. M., Bell, M. C., & Cepeda, N. J. (2012). Diminished but not forgotten: Effects of aging on magnitude of spacing effect benefits. / Journals of Gerontology, 68B, 674-80. doi:10.1093/geronb/gbs096
  43. Sobel, H. S., Cepeda, N. J., & Kapler, I. V. (2011). Spacing effects in real-world classroom vocabulary learning. / Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25, 763-67. CrossRef
  44. Toppino, T. C., Fearnow-Kenney, M. D., Kiepert, M. H., & Teremula, A. C. (2009). The spacing effect in intentional and incidental free recall by children and adults: Limits on the automaticity hypothesis. / Memory & Cognition, 37, 316-25. doi:10.3758/MC.37.3.316 CrossRef
  45. Tully, T., Preat, T., Boynton, S. C., & Del Vecchio, M. (1994). Genetic dissection of consolidated memory in Drosophila. / Cell, 79, 35-7. CrossRef
  46. Wissman, K. T., Rawson, K. A., & Pyc, M. A. (2012). How and when do students use flashcards? / Memory, 20, 568-79. CrossRef
  47. Zacks, J. M., & Swallow, K. M. (2007). Event segmentation. / Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 80-4. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00480.x CrossRef
  48. Zacks, J. M., Speer, N. K., Swallow, K. M., Braver, T. S., & Reynolds, J. R. (2007). Event perception: A mind/brain perspective. / Psychological Bulletin, 133, 273-93. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.2.273 CrossRef
  
• 作者单位：Mary A. Pyc (1)
  David A. Balota (1)
  Kathleen B. McDermott (1)
  Tim Tully (2)
  Henry L. Roediger III (1)
  
  1. Department of Psychology, Washington University, One Brookings Drive, Box 1125, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA
  2. Dart Neuroscience, San Diego, CA, USA
  
• ISSN：1532-5946

文摘

Although the benefits of spaced retrieval for long-term retention are well established, the majority of this work has involved spacing over relatively short intervals (on the order of seconds or minutes). In the present experiments, we evaluated the effectiveness of spaced retrieval across relatively short intervals (within a single session), as compared to longer intervals (between sessions spaced a day apart), for long-term retention (i.e., one day or one week). Across a series of seven experiments, participants (N = 536) learned paired associates to a criterion of 70?% accuracy and then received one test–feedback trial for each item. The test–feedback trial occurred within 10?min of reaching criterion (short lag) or one day later (long lag). Then, a final test occurred one day (Exps. 1-span class="a-plus-plus internal-ref refid-sec8">3) or one week (Exps. 4 and 5) after the test–feedback trial. Across the different materials and methods in Experiments 1-span class="a-plus-plus internal-ref refid-sec8">3, we found little benefit for the long-lag relative to the short-lag schedule in final recall performance—that is, no lag effect—but large effects on the retention of information from the test–feedback to the final test phase. The results from the experiments with the one-week retention interval (Exps. 4 and 5) indicated a benefit of the long-lag schedule on final recall performance (a lag effect), as well as on retention. This research shows that even when the benefits of lag are eliminated at a (relatively long) one-day retention interval, the lag effect reemerges after a one-week retention interval. The results are interpreted within an extension of the bifurcation model to the spacing effect.