The Effect of Different-Language Repetition on Spacing Effects in Free Recall: An Investigation of the Enabling Conditions of Study Phase Retrieval

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter P. J. L. Verkoeijen ◽  
Remy M. J. P. Rikers ◽  
Henk G. Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
Free Recall ◽  
Phase Retrieval ◽  
Study Phase ◽  
Spacing Effects

Limitations to the Spacing Effect

2005 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 257-263 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter P. J. L. Verkoeijen ◽  
Remy M. J. P. Rikers ◽  
Henk G. Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
Free Recall ◽  
Phase Retrieval ◽  
Incidental Learning ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Recall Performance ◽  
Spacing Effect ◽  
Word List ◽  
Intentional Learning ◽  
Study Phase ◽  
Learning Condition

Abstract. The spacing effect refers to the finding that memory for repeated items improves when the interrepetition interval increases. To explain the spacing effect in free-recall tasks, a two-factor model has been put forward that combines mechanisms of contextual variability and study-phase retrieval (e.g., Raaijmakers, 2003 ; Verkoeijen, Rikers, & Schmidt, 2004 ). An important, yet untested, implication of this model is that free recall of repetitions should follow an inverted u-shaped relationship with interrepetition spacing. To demonstrate the suggested relationship an experiment was conducted. Participants studied a word list, consisting of items repeated at different interrepetition intervals, either under incidental or under intentional learning instructions. Subsequently, participants received a free-recall test. The results revealed an inverted u-shaped relationship between free recall and interrepetition spacing in both the incidental-learning condition and the intentional-learning condition. Moreover, for intentionally learned repetitions, the maximum free-recall performance was located at a longer interrepetition interval than for incidentally learned repetitions. These findings are interpreted in terms of the two-factor model of spacing effects in free-recall tasks.

Study-Phase Retrieval: Suppressing False Recognition in a Repetition Paradigm

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter M. Wessels ◽  
Jonathan Schnader ◽  
Allison Smith ◽  
Christopher Thomas ◽  
Haley Titus
Keyword(s):  
False Recognition ◽  
Phase Retrieval ◽  
Study Phase

Distributed Practice or Spacing Effect

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shana K. Carpenter
Keyword(s):  
Information Needs ◽  
Phase Retrieval ◽  
Spacing Effect ◽  
Learning Opportunities ◽  
Distributed Practice ◽  
Study Phase ◽  
Full Potential ◽  
Spaced Learning ◽  
Encoding Variability ◽  
Massed Learning

The spacing effect (also known as distributed practice) refers to the finding that two or more learning opportunities that are spaced apart, or distributed, in time produce better learning than the same opportunities that occur in close succession. A number of theories have been proposed to account for the spacing effect. These include deficient processing, encoding variability, study-phase retrieval, and consolidation. According to the deficient processing account, learning opportunities that are spaced apart in time, compared to non-spaced or “massed” learning opportunities, are more likely to receive a learner’s full attention, ultimately leading to better quality learning. The encoding variability account proposes that spaced learning opportunities, because they are separated in time, are more likely to be associated with a number of different contextual cues that can benefit later memory for the information learned. Study-phase retrieval is based on the premise that retrieval benefits learning, and spaced learning opportunities are more likely than massed learning opportunities to involve retrieval of the previous learning experience. More recent evidence suggests that spacing learning opportunities across different days may benefit memory due to sleep-dependent neural consolidation processes. Research in authentic educational contexts shows that spacing benefits learning of a wide variety of materials, from basic facts to complex scientific concepts and skills. Regarding the practical question of when spaced learning opportunities should occur, the ideal scheduling of these opportunities depends upon how long the information needs to be remembered in the future, such that retention over longer intervals of time benefits most by longer spacing between repeated learning opportunities. Despite its promise for enhancing student learning, spacing can be challenging to implement in authentic educational contexts due to the intuitive notion that immediate repetition is better for learning, and the difficulties involved in setting a spaced study schedule in advance and adhering to it. To realize the full potential of spacing to enhance educational practices, future studies are needed that can measure implementation of spacing by students and teachers in real educational environments.

Spacing Effects on Implicit Picture Memory

1998 ◽  
Vol 86 (2) ◽  
pp. 396-398
Author(s):  
Norihiko Kitao
Keyword(s):  
Free Recall ◽  
Recall Test ◽  
Perceptual Identification ◽  
Free Recall Test ◽  
Perceptual Cues ◽  
Test Analysis ◽  
Picture Memory ◽  
Spacing Effects ◽  
Short Period ◽  
Identification Test

25 undergraduates studied the stimulus pictures of common objects successively presented as spaced or massed repetitions, or one at a time. Immediately after a study period, they were given a free-recall test followed by a perceptual identification test. Analysis indicated that spacing effects were observed on the free-recall test but not in perceptual identification. On the later test, each stimulus picture was exposed for a short period and subjects were more likely to use perceptual cues than on first the test. Thus, the spacing effects on memory may be eliminated at test as there is no benefit of conceptual cues.

Effects of repetition as a function of study-phase retrieval

1976 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
pp. 529-536 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel J. Thios ◽  
Paul R. D'Agostino
Keyword(s):  
Phase Retrieval ◽  
Study Phase

Production and accent affect memory

2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 295-319 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kit W. Cho ◽  
Laurie B. Feldman
Keyword(s):  
Free Recall ◽  
Recognition Memory ◽  
American English ◽  
Study Phase

In three experiments, we examined the effects of accents and production on free recall and yes/no recognition memory. In the study phase, native English participants heard English words pronounced by a speaker with an accent that is highly familiar to the participant (American English) or with a less familiar accent (Dutch). Participants had to either say aloud (produce) the word that they heard in their natural pronunciation (Exp. 1a) or imitate the original speaker (Exp. 1b) or simply listen to the word. In all experiments, in both recall and recognition, produced words and words spoken in an unfamiliar accent were more likely to be recalled and more likely to be recognized, than words that were listened to or words spoken in a more familiar accent. In recognition but not in recall, listening to words spoken in an unfamiliar accent improved memory more than listening to words spoken in a familiar accent. Results suggest that listening allows the acoustic-phonetic details of a speaker to be retained in memory, but that production attenuates details about the original speaker’s pronunciation. Finally, the benefit of production for memory does not differ whether one produces in one’s natural accent or imitates that of the speaker.

Detrimental Influence of Contextual Change on Spacing Effects in Free Recall.

2004 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 796-800 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter P. J. L. Verkoeijen ◽  
Remy M. J. P. Rikers ◽  
Henk G. Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
Free Recall ◽  
Spacing Effects ◽  
Contextual Change

Encoding Richness of Self-Generated Elaboration and Spacing Effects on Incidental Memory

2005 ◽  
Vol 101 (2) ◽  
pp. 621-627 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiroshi Toyota ◽  
Yasuko Kikuchi
Keyword(s):  
Free Recall ◽  
Target Sentence ◽  
The Self ◽  
The Other ◽  
Spacing Effects ◽  
Elaboration Condition ◽  
Incidental Memory ◽  
Encoding Variability

The present study investigated encoding variability in self-generated elaboration on incidental memory as a function of the type of presentation which was either massed or spaced. The subjects generated different answers to a “why” question for the first and the second presentations of a target sentence in a self-generated elaboration condition. In an experimenter-provided elaboration condition they then rated the appropriateness of the different answers provided by the experimenter for the first and second presentations. This procedure was followed by two free recall tests, one of which was immediate and the other delayed. A self-generated elaboration effect was observed in both the spaced and the massed presentations. These results indicated that the self-generated elaboration effect was facilitated, even in the massed presentation because the different answers to the first and the second presentations led to a richer encoding of each target.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document