The next generation: the value of reminding - PubMed

The next generation: the value of reminding

Colin M MacLeod et al. Mem Cognit. 2012 Jul.

Abstract

In two experiments, we investigated the influence of repeated processing in the context of the generation effect. In both experiments, participants studied words once or twice. Once-studied words either were read or were generated from a definition. Twice-studied words were read both times, generated both times, or read once and generated once. Free recall was best (in order of decreasing performance) after generating twice, after generating plus reading, and finally after generating once; any generation was better than purely reading. Recognition showed a similar pattern, except that the benefit of generating twice was not as striking as in recall and that reading plus generating was just as effective as generating twice. The overall pattern of results is accounted for by a simple model in which a second encoding results in a reminding of the first encoding, and this additional encoding supports subsequent recollection. This reminding is, consequently, more effective in recall than in recognition, and it operates in accordance with the principles of transfer-appropriate processing.

Similar articles

• Production benefits both recollection and familiarity.

  Ozubko JD, Gopie N, MacLeod CM. Ozubko JD, et al. Mem Cognit. 2012 Apr;40(3):326-38. doi: 10.3758/s13421-011-0165-1. Mem Cognit. 2012. PMID: 22127849

• Generation enhances semantic processing? The role of distinctiveness in the generation effect.

  Kinoshita S. Kinoshita S. Mem Cognit. 1989 Sep;17(5):563-71. doi: 10.3758/bf03197079. Mem Cognit. 1989. PMID: 2796741

• The consequence of refreshing for access to nonselected items in young and older adults.

  Higgins JA, Johnson MK. Higgins JA, et al. Mem Cognit. 2009 Mar;37(2):164-74. doi: 10.3758/MC.37.2.164. Mem Cognit. 2009. PMID: 19223566 Free PMC article.

• Selective Reminding and Free and Cued Selective Reminding in Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer Disease.

  Lemos R, Afonso A, Martins C, Waters JH, Blanco FS, Simões MR, Santana I. Lemos R, et al. Appl Neuropsychol Adult. 2016;23(2):85-93. doi: 10.1080/23279095.2015.1012761. Epub 2015 Sep 16. Appl Neuropsychol Adult. 2016. PMID: 26375308

• Determinants of positive and negative generation effects in free recall.

  Steffens MC, Erdfelder E. Steffens MC, et al. Q J Exp Psychol A. 1998 Nov;51(4):705-33. doi: 10.1080/713755794. Q J Exp Psychol A. 1998. PMID: 9854440 Review.

Cited by

• When will bigger be (recalled) better? The influence of category size on JOLs depends on test format.

  Hourihan KL, Tullis JG. Hourihan KL, et al. Mem Cognit. 2015 Aug;43(6):910-21. doi: 10.3758/s13421-015-0516-4. Mem Cognit. 2015. PMID: 25758175

• Top-down constraint on recognition memory.

  Kantner J, Lindsay DS. Kantner J, et al. Mem Cognit. 2013 Apr;41(3):465-79. doi: 10.3758/s13421-012-0265-6. Mem Cognit. 2013. PMID: 23180311

• Continued effects of context reinstatement in recognition.

  Hanczakowski M, Zawadzka K, Macken B. Hanczakowski M, et al. Mem Cognit. 2015 Jul;43(5):788-97. doi: 10.3758/s13421-014-0502-2. Mem Cognit. 2015. PMID: 25586819

References

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources

• Full Text Sources

  • Springer