The influence of retrieval on retention - PubMed
The influence of retrieval on retention
M Carrier et al. Mem Cognit. 1992 Nov.
Abstract
Four experiments tested the hypothesis that successful retrieval of an item from memory affects retention only because the retrieval provides an additional presentation of the target item. Two methods of learning paired associates were compared. In the pure study trial (pure ST condition) method, both items of a pair were presented simultaneously for study. In the test trial/study trial (TTST condition) method, subjects attempted to retrieve the response term during a period in which only the stimulus term was present (and the response term of the pair was presented after a 5-sec delay). Final retention of target items was tested with cued-recall tests. In Experiment 1, there was a reliable advantage in final testing for nonsense-syllable/number pairs in the TTST condition over pairs in the pure ST condition. In Experiment 2, the same result was obtained with Eskimo/English word pairs. This benefit of the TTST condition was not apparently different for final retrieval after 5 min or after 24 h. Experiments 3 and 4 ruled out two artifactual explanations of the TTST advantage observed in the first two experiments. Because performing a memory retrieval (TTST condition) led to better performance than pure study (pure ST condition), the results reject the hypothesis that a successful retrieval is beneficial only to the extent that it provides another study experience.
Similar articles
-
Practicing more retrieval routes leads to greater memory retention.
Zheng J, Zhang W, Li T, Liu Z, Luo L. Zheng J, et al. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2016 Sep;169:109-18. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.05.014. Epub 2016 Jun 4. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2016. PMID: 27270228 Clinical Trial.
-
What types of learning are enhanced by a cued recall test?
Carpenter SK, Pashler H, Vul E. Carpenter SK, et al. Psychon Bull Rev. 2006 Oct;13(5):826-30. doi: 10.3758/bf03194004. Psychon Bull Rev. 2006. PMID: 17328380
-
Carpenter SK, DeLosh EL. Carpenter SK, et al. Mem Cognit. 2006 Mar;34(2):268-76. doi: 10.3758/bf03193405. Mem Cognit. 2006. PMID: 16752591
-
Camp G, Pecher D, Schmidt HG. Camp G, et al. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2007 Sep;33(5):950-8. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.33.5.950. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2007. PMID: 17723071
-
An ARC-REM model for accuracy and response time in recognition and recall.
Diller DE, Nobel PA, Shiffrin RM. Diller DE, et al. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2001 Mar;27(2):414-35. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.27.2.414. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2001. PMID: 11294441 Review.
Cited by
-
The "pure-study" learning curve: the learning curve without cumulative testing.
Roediger HL 3rd, Smith MA. Roediger HL 3rd, et al. Mem Cognit. 2012 Oct;40(7):989-1002. doi: 10.3758/s13421-012-0213-5. Mem Cognit. 2012. PMID: 22644774
-
Attention during memory retrieval enhances future remembering.
Dudukovic NM, Dubrow S, Wagner AD. Dudukovic NM, et al. Mem Cognit. 2009 Oct;37(7):953-61. doi: 10.3758/MC.37.7.953. Mem Cognit. 2009. PMID: 19744935 Free PMC article.
-
Internal attention to features in visual short-term memory guides object learning.
Fan JE, Turk-Browne NB. Fan JE, et al. Cognition. 2013 Nov;129(2):292-308. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.06.007. Epub 2013 Aug 15. Cognition. 2013. PMID: 23954925 Free PMC article.
-
How crucial is the response format for the testing effect?
Jönsson FU, Kubik V, Sundqvist ML, Todorov I, Jonsson B. Jönsson FU, et al. Psychol Res. 2014 Sep;78(5):623-33. doi: 10.1007/s00426-013-0522-8. Epub 2013 Oct 31. Psychol Res. 2014. PMID: 24173813
-
Optimizing multiple-choice tests as tools for learning.
Little JL, Bjork EL. Little JL, et al. Mem Cognit. 2015 Jan;43(1):14-26. doi: 10.3758/s13421-014-0452-8. Mem Cognit. 2015. PMID: 25123774