Literature DB >> 21287102

Encoding processes and the spacing effect.

F S Bellezza1, H B Winkler, F Andrasik.   

Abstract

The differential encoding theory of the spacing effect was tested utilizing Martin's (1968) encoding variability notion, in which it is hypothesized that low-meaningfulness items are more variable in their encodings than are high-meaningfulness items. In a series of three experiments using a continuous paired associate learning task, it was predicted that the spacing vs. performance curves for CCC items would show a faster improvement in performance than would the curves for high-meaningfulness CVC items. None of the experiments supported this prediction. In addition, it was found that items recognized on their second presentation were more likely to be recalled than were those items not recognized. It was concluded that an item's repetitions are more effective if one code is formed and elaborated with each repetition rather than if more than one code is formed.

Year:  1975        PMID: 21287102     DOI: 10.3758/BF03212940

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  4 in total

1.  Effect of spacing presentations on retention of a paired associate over short intervals.

Authors:  L R PETERSON; R WAMPLER; M KIRKPATRICK; D SALTZMAN
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1963-08

2.  Repetition and retrieval from memory.

Authors:  A W Melton
Journal:  Science       Date:  1967-10-27       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 3.  Stimulus meaningfulness and paired-associate transfer: an encoding variability hypothesis.

Authors:  E Martin
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1968-09       Impact factor: 8.934

4.  Reinforcement as consolidation.

Authors:  T K Landauer
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1969-01       Impact factor: 8.934

  4 in total
  6 in total

1.  Encoding variability theory and the spacing effect in associate learning.

Authors:  J F Bray; D Robbins; W B Witcher
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1976-09

2.  On the importance of looking back: the role of recursive remindings in recency judgments and cued recall.

Authors:  Larry L Jacoby; Christopher N Wahlheim
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2013-07

Review 3.  What makes distributed practice effective?

Authors:  Aaron S Benjamin; Jonathan Tullis
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Contributions of familiarity and recollection rejection to recognition: evidence from the time course of false recognition for semantic and conjunction lures.

Authors:  Laura E Matzen; Eric G Taylor; Aaron S Benjamin
Journal:  Memory       Date:  2011-01

5.  The role of reminding in the effects of spaced repetitions on cued recall: sufficient but not necessary.

Authors:  Christopher N Wahlheim; Geoffrey B Maddox; Larry L Jacoby
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2013-08-12       Impact factor: 3.051

6.  Comparison versus reminding.

Authors:  Jonathan G Tullis; Robert L Goldstone
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2016-12-12
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.