Literature DB >> 21480751

When does testing enhance retention? A distribution-based interpretation of retrieval as a memory modifier.

Vered Halamish1, Robert A Bjork.   

Abstract

Tests, as learning events, can enhance subsequent recall more than do additional study opportunities, even without feedback. Such advantages of testing tend to appear, however, only at long retention intervals and/or when criterion tests stress recall, rather than recognition, processes. We propose that the interaction of the benefits of testing versus restudying with final-test delay and format reflects not only that successful retrievals are more powerful learning events than are re-presentations but also that the distribution of memory strengths across items is shifted differentially by testing and restudying. The benefits of initial testing over restudying, in this view, should increase as the delay or format of the final test makes that test more difficult. Final-test difficulty, not the similarity of initial-test and final-test conditions, should determine the benefits of testing. In Experiments 1 and 2 we indeed found that initial cued-recall testing enhanced subsequent recall more than did restudying when the final test was a difficult (free-recall) test but not when it was an easier (cued-recall) test that matched the initial test. The results of Experiment 3 supported a new prediction of the distribution framework: namely, that the final cued-recall test that did not show a benefit of testing in Experiment 1 should show such a benefit when that test was made more difficult by introducing retroactive interference. Overall, our results suggest that the differential consequences of initial testing versus restudying reflect, in part, differences in how items distributions are shifted by testing and studying.

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21480751     DOI: 10.1037/a0023219

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn        ISSN: 0278-7393            Impact factor:   3.051


  30 in total

1.  The "pure-study" learning curve: the learning curve without cumulative testing.

Authors:  Henry L Roediger; Megan A Smith
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2012-10

2.  Retrieval practice can eliminate list method directed forgetting.

Authors:  Magdalena Abel; Karl-Heinz T Bäuml
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2016-01

3.  Reversing the testing effect by feedback: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence.

Authors:  Bernhard Pastötter; Karl-Heinz T Bäuml
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 3.282

4.  How crucial is the response format for the testing effect?

Authors:  Fredrik U Jönsson; Veit Kubik; Max Larsson Sundqvist; Ivo Todorov; Bert Jonsson
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2013-10-31

5.  A Subgroup Analysis of the Impact of Self-testing Frequency on Examination Scores in a Pathophysiology Course.

Authors:  Peter C Panus; David W Stewart; Nicholas E Hagemeier; Jim C Thigpen; Lauren Brooks
Journal:  Am J Pharm Educ       Date:  2014-11-15       Impact factor: 2.047

6.  Does the benefit of testing depend on lag, and if so, why? Evaluating the elaborative retrieval hypothesis.

Authors:  Katherine A Rawson; Kalif E Vaughn; Shana K Carpenter
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2015-05

Review 7.  A dual memory theory of the testing effect.

Authors:  Timothy C Rickard; Steven C Pan
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2018-06

8.  Retrieval dynamics and retention in cross-situational statistical word learning.

Authors:  Haley A Vlach; Catherine M Sandhofer
Journal:  Cogn Sci       Date:  2013-10-07

9.  Comparing the testing effect under blocked and mixed practice: The mnemonic benefits of retrieval practice are not affected by practice format.

Authors:  Magdalena Abel; Henry L Roediger
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2017-01

10.  Hypermnesia and the Role of Delay between Study and Test.

Authors:  Lisa A Wallner; Karl-Heinz T Bäuml
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2018-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.