{"title":"没有证据表明对新奇的、无意义的物体有视觉测试效果。","authors":"Anna C McCarter, David E Huber, Rosemary A Cowell","doi":"10.1037/xlm0001430","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The testing effect is a well-established phenomenon in which memory is better for information that has been enhanced through practice tests rather than through restudying. However, this phenomenon has been studied almost exclusively with verbal or semantically meaningful material. We explored whether the testing effect holds for abstract visual material that lacks both meaning and verbal labels. In a series of six experiments, no evidence for a testing effect was found. Each experiment changed the nature of test practice in different ways that were designed to bolster test practice relative to restudy, such as imposing a delay before the final test, providing different kinds of choice options, providing different kinds of practice feedback, and using drawing as the form of test practice, and yet, the performance after test practice was either similar to the performance after restudy or in some cases significantly worse than restudy (i.e., a negative testing effect). We discuss the theoretical implications of these results, which suggest either that the testing effect relies on properties that our stimuli did not possess-for example, semantic content, high-dimensional content, or preexisting neocortical representations-or that eliciting a testing effect for visual material requires radically different task parameters than for verbal material. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":50194,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition","volume":" ","pages":"1122-1140"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12870414/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"No evidence of a visual testing effect for novel, meaningless objects.\",\"authors\":\"Anna C McCarter, David E Huber, Rosemary A Cowell\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/xlm0001430\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The testing effect is a well-established phenomenon in which memory is better for information that has been enhanced through practice tests rather than through restudying. However, this phenomenon has been studied almost exclusively with verbal or semantically meaningful material. We explored whether the testing effect holds for abstract visual material that lacks both meaning and verbal labels. In a series of six experiments, no evidence for a testing effect was found. Each experiment changed the nature of test practice in different ways that were designed to bolster test practice relative to restudy, such as imposing a delay before the final test, providing different kinds of choice options, providing different kinds of practice feedback, and using drawing as the form of test practice, and yet, the performance after test practice was either similar to the performance after restudy or in some cases significantly worse than restudy (i.e., a negative testing effect). We discuss the theoretical implications of these results, which suggest either that the testing effect relies on properties that our stimuli did not possess-for example, semantic content, high-dimensional content, or preexisting neocortical representations-or that eliciting a testing effect for visual material requires radically different task parameters than for verbal material. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50194,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1122-1140\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12870414/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0001430\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0001430","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
测试效应是一个公认的现象,通过练习测试而不是通过重新学习增强的信息记忆更好。然而,这一现象的研究几乎仅限于口头或语义上有意义的材料。我们探讨了测试效果是否适用于缺乏意义和语言标签的抽象视觉材料。在一系列的六个实验中,没有发现测试效果的证据。每个实验都以不同的方式改变了测试练习的性质,这些方式旨在加强相对于重新学习的测试练习,例如在最终测试前施加延迟,提供不同类型的选择选项,提供不同类型的练习反馈,以及使用绘图作为测试练习的形式,然而,测试练习后的表现要么与重新学习后的表现相似,要么在某些情况下明显不如重新学习(例如:负测试效应)。我们讨论了这些结果的理论含义,这表明测试效果依赖于我们的刺激不具备的属性,例如语义内容、高维内容或先前存在的新皮层表征,或者对视觉材料的测试效果需要与口头材料截然不同的任务参数。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
No evidence of a visual testing effect for novel, meaningless objects.
The testing effect is a well-established phenomenon in which memory is better for information that has been enhanced through practice tests rather than through restudying. However, this phenomenon has been studied almost exclusively with verbal or semantically meaningful material. We explored whether the testing effect holds for abstract visual material that lacks both meaning and verbal labels. In a series of six experiments, no evidence for a testing effect was found. Each experiment changed the nature of test practice in different ways that were designed to bolster test practice relative to restudy, such as imposing a delay before the final test, providing different kinds of choice options, providing different kinds of practice feedback, and using drawing as the form of test practice, and yet, the performance after test practice was either similar to the performance after restudy or in some cases significantly worse than restudy (i.e., a negative testing effect). We discuss the theoretical implications of these results, which suggest either that the testing effect relies on properties that our stimuli did not possess-for example, semantic content, high-dimensional content, or preexisting neocortical representations-or that eliciting a testing effect for visual material requires radically different task parameters than for verbal material. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition publishes studies on perception, control of action, perceptual aspects of language processing, and related cognitive processes.