提示回忆中测试和正向测试效应的相互作用:理论、个体差异研究和应用的启示

IF 2.9 1区 心理学 Q1 LINGUISTICS Journal of memory and language Pub Date : 2023-11-16 DOI:10.1016/j.jml.2023.104476
Mohan W. Gupta , Steven C. Pan , Timothy C. Rickard
{"title":"提示回忆中测试和正向测试效应的相互作用:理论、个体差异研究和应用的启示","authors":"Mohan W. Gupta ,&nbsp;Steven C. Pan ,&nbsp;Timothy C. Rickard","doi":"10.1016/j.jml.2023.104476","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Recall from episodic memory has been shown to enhance both memory for the retrieved information (e.g., relative to a restudy control condition; the <em>testing effect, or</em> TE) and memory for different, subsequently studied materials (the <em>forward testing effect, or</em> FTE). Hence, the TE may be subject to an FTE confound when training in a TE experiment involves either testing prior to restudy or when restudied and tested items are randomly mixed. Across two cued-recall TE experiments, we show that (1) a potent FTE confound exists in the test-first but not the mixed training design, (2) there are no other evident learning related interactions between restudied and tested items across three frequently used training phase task orderings, and (3) the predictions of the dual-memory model of test-enhanced learning – which posits that a test trial creates a memory that is separate from the initially encoded study memory, yielding two routes to retrieval for tested items – are held both when there is and is not a confounding FTE. Further, our results yielded no evidence for two accounts of the FTE (the proactive interference and reset of encoding hypotheses) as applied to cued recall but are consistent with two alternative accounts (the strategy change and increasing effort hypotheses). Through distribution analyses we identify a novel and potent FTE individual differences effect that can be accommodated by the latter accounts. Finally, we show that at least three large-<em>n</em> studies exploring individual differences in the TE are confounded by the FTE, compromising conclusions in those papers about the efficacy of the TE across individuals.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16493,"journal":{"name":"Journal of memory and language","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749596X2300075X/pdfft?md5=fb987b63056b3e615d24c1ad82319ffa&pid=1-s2.0-S0749596X2300075X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interaction between the testing and forward testing effects in the case of Cued-Recall: Implications for Theory, individual difference Studies, and application\",\"authors\":\"Mohan W. Gupta ,&nbsp;Steven C. Pan ,&nbsp;Timothy C. Rickard\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jml.2023.104476\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Recall from episodic memory has been shown to enhance both memory for the retrieved information (e.g., relative to a restudy control condition; the <em>testing effect, or</em> TE) and memory for different, subsequently studied materials (the <em>forward testing effect, or</em> FTE). Hence, the TE may be subject to an FTE confound when training in a TE experiment involves either testing prior to restudy or when restudied and tested items are randomly mixed. Across two cued-recall TE experiments, we show that (1) a potent FTE confound exists in the test-first but not the mixed training design, (2) there are no other evident learning related interactions between restudied and tested items across three frequently used training phase task orderings, and (3) the predictions of the dual-memory model of test-enhanced learning – which posits that a test trial creates a memory that is separate from the initially encoded study memory, yielding two routes to retrieval for tested items – are held both when there is and is not a confounding FTE. Further, our results yielded no evidence for two accounts of the FTE (the proactive interference and reset of encoding hypotheses) as applied to cued recall but are consistent with two alternative accounts (the strategy change and increasing effort hypotheses). Through distribution analyses we identify a novel and potent FTE individual differences effect that can be accommodated by the latter accounts. Finally, we show that at least three large-<em>n</em> studies exploring individual differences in the TE are confounded by the FTE, compromising conclusions in those papers about the efficacy of the TE across individuals.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16493,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of memory and language\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749596X2300075X/pdfft?md5=fb987b63056b3e615d24c1ad82319ffa&pid=1-s2.0-S0749596X2300075X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of memory and language\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749596X2300075X\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of memory and language","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749596X2300075X","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

从情景记忆中回忆已被证明可以增强对检索信息的记忆(例如,相对于再学习控制条件;对于不同的,随后研究的材料(正向测试效应,或FTE)和记忆。因此,当TE实验中的训练包括重新学习之前的测试或重新学习和测试的项目随机混合时,TE可能会受到FTE混淆的影响。在两个线索回忆TE实验中,我们发现:(1)在测试优先而不是混合训练设计中存在有效的FTE混淆,(2)在三个经常使用的训练阶段任务顺序中,重新学习和被测试项目之间没有其他明显的学习相关交互作用,以及(3)测试增强学习的双记忆模型的预测-假设测试试验创造了与最初编码的学习记忆分开的记忆。在存在和不存在混淆FTE的情况下,产生两种检索测试项目的途径。此外,我们的研究结果没有为FTE的两种解释(主动干扰和编码重置假设)在线索回忆中的应用提供证据,但与两种替代解释(策略变化和增加努力假设)一致。通过分布分析,我们发现了一种新的、有效的FTE个体差异效应,这种效应可以被后一种解释所适应。最后,我们表明,至少有三个探究TE个体差异的大n研究与FTE混淆,损害了这些论文中关于TE在个体间有效性的结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Interaction between the testing and forward testing effects in the case of Cued-Recall: Implications for Theory, individual difference Studies, and application

Recall from episodic memory has been shown to enhance both memory for the retrieved information (e.g., relative to a restudy control condition; the testing effect, or TE) and memory for different, subsequently studied materials (the forward testing effect, or FTE). Hence, the TE may be subject to an FTE confound when training in a TE experiment involves either testing prior to restudy or when restudied and tested items are randomly mixed. Across two cued-recall TE experiments, we show that (1) a potent FTE confound exists in the test-first but not the mixed training design, (2) there are no other evident learning related interactions between restudied and tested items across three frequently used training phase task orderings, and (3) the predictions of the dual-memory model of test-enhanced learning – which posits that a test trial creates a memory that is separate from the initially encoded study memory, yielding two routes to retrieval for tested items – are held both when there is and is not a confounding FTE. Further, our results yielded no evidence for two accounts of the FTE (the proactive interference and reset of encoding hypotheses) as applied to cued recall but are consistent with two alternative accounts (the strategy change and increasing effort hypotheses). Through distribution analyses we identify a novel and potent FTE individual differences effect that can be accommodated by the latter accounts. Finally, we show that at least three large-n studies exploring individual differences in the TE are confounded by the FTE, compromising conclusions in those papers about the efficacy of the TE across individuals.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.70
自引率
14.00%
发文量
49
审稿时长
12.7 weeks
期刊介绍: Articles in the Journal of Memory and Language contribute to the formulation of scientific issues and theories in the areas of memory, language comprehension and production, and cognitive processes. Special emphasis is given to research articles that provide new theoretical insights based on a carefully laid empirical foundation. The journal generally favors articles that provide multiple experiments. In addition, significant theoretical papers without new experimental findings may be published. The Journal of Memory and Language is a valuable tool for cognitive scientists, including psychologists, linguists, and others interested in memory and learning, language, reading, and speech. Research Areas include: • Topics that illuminate aspects of memory or language processing • Linguistics • Neuropsychology.
期刊最新文献
Exogenous spatial attention selects associated novel bindings in working memory Retrieval-induced semantic interference Editorial Board Bidialectal language representation and processing: Evidence from Norwegian ERPs Pragmatic inferencing influences the referential status of all potential referents in word learning
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1