Literature DB >> 22238214

When and why do retrieval attempts enhance subsequent encoding?

Phillip J Grimaldi1, Jeffrey D Karpicke.   

Abstract

Unsuccessful retrieval attempts can enhance subsequent encoding and learning. In three experiments, subjects either attempted to retrieve word pairs prior to studying them (e.g., attempting to recall tide-? before studying tide-beach) or did not attempt retrieval and retention of the studied targets was assessed on a subsequent cued recall test. Experiment 1 showed that attempting retrieval enhanced subsequent encoding and recall relative to not attempting retrieval when the word pairs were semantically related, but not when the pairs were unrelated. In Experiment 2, studying a different word pair prior to the correct pair (e.g., studying tide-wave prior to tide-beach) did not produce the same effect as attempting retrieval prior to studying. Constraining retrieval to a particular candidate word prior to study (e.g., recalling tide-wa__ before studying tide-beach) produced a negative effect on subsequent recall. Experiment 3 showed that attempting retrieval did not enhance encoding when a brief delay occurred between the retrieval attempt and the subsequent study trial. The results support the idea that a search set of candidates related to the retrieval cue is activated during retrieval and that this retrieval-specific activation can enhance subsequent encoding of those candidates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22238214     DOI: 10.3758/s13421-011-0174-0

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


  16 in total

1.  The influence of retrieval on retention.

Authors:  M Carrier; H Pashler
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1992-11

2.  Fate of first-list associations in transfer theory.

Authors:  J M BARNES; B J UNDERWOOD
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1959-08

3.  Retrieval during learning facilitates subsequent memory encoding.

Authors:  Bernhard Pastötter; Sabine Schicker; Julia Niedernhuber; Karl-Heinz T Bäuml
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 3.051

4.  Cue strength as a moderator of the testing effect: the benefits of elaborative retrieval.

Authors:  Shana K Carpenter
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 3.051

5.  Metacognitive control and strategy selection: deciding to practice retrieval during learning.

Authors:  Jeffrey D Karpicke
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2009-11

6.  Incongruous item generation effects: a multiple-cue perspective.

Authors:  S A Soraci; J J Franks; J D Bransford; R A Chechile; R F Belli; M Carr; M Carlin
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 3.051

7.  A retrieval model for both recognition and recall.

Authors:  G Gillund; R M Shiffrin
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1984-01       Impact factor: 8.934

8.  The pretesting effect: do unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhance learning?

Authors:  Lindsey E Richland; Nate Kornell; Liche Sean Kao
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Appl       Date:  2009-09

9.  Elaborative processing and conjunction errors in recognition memory.

Authors:  Jason Arndt; Todd C Jones
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2008-07

10.  Unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhance subsequent learning.

Authors:  Nate Kornell; Matthew Jensen Hays; Robert A Bjork
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 3.051

View more
  23 in total

1.  Making related errors facilitates learning, but learners do not know it.

Authors:  Barbie J Huelser; Janet Metcalfe
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2012-05

2.  Test-potentiated learning: distinguishing between direct and indirect effects of tests.

Authors:  Kathleen M Arnold; Kathleen B McDermott
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2012-07-09       Impact factor: 3.051

3.  Learning from one's own errors and those of others.

Authors:  Janet Metcalfe; Judy Xu
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2018-02

4.  Multiple-choice pretesting potentiates learning of related information.

Authors:  Jeri L Little; Elizabeth Ligon Bjork
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2016-10

5.  Free recall enhances subsequent learning.

Authors:  Kathleen M Arnold; Kathleen B McDermott
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2013-06

6.  Individual differences in task-specific paired associates learning in older adults: the role of processing speed and working memory.

Authors:  Tanja Kurtz; Jacqueline Mogle; Martin J Sliwinski; Scott M Hofer
Journal:  Exp Aging Res       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 1.645

7.  Interactive Book Reading to Accelerate Word Learning by Kindergarten Children With Specific Language Impairment: Identifying Adequate Progress and Successful Learning Patterns.

Authors:  Holly L Storkel; Rouzana Komesidou; Kandace K Fleming; Rebecca Swinburne Romine
Journal:  Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch       Date:  2017-04-20       Impact factor: 2.983

8.  The costs and benefits of testing and guessing on recognition memory.

Authors:  Mark J Huff; David A Balota; Keith A Hutchison
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2016-03-07       Impact factor: 3.051

9.  Desirable Difficulties in Vocabulary Learning.

Authors:  Robert A Bjork; Judith F Kroll
Journal:  Am J Psychol       Date:  2015

10.  A multi-study examination of the role of repeated spaced retrieval in the word learning of children with developmental language disorder.

Authors:  Laurence B Leonard; Sharon L Christ; Patricia Deevy; Jeffrey D Karpicke; Christine Weber; Eileen Haebig; Justin B Kueser; Sofía Souto; Windi Krok
Journal:  J Neurodev Disord       Date:  2021-05-15       Impact factor: 4.025

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.