Spacing enhances the learning of natural concepts: an investigation of mechanisms, metacognition, and aging
In two experiments, we examined spacing effects on the learning of bird families and metacognitive assessments of such learning. Results revealed that spacing enhanced learning beyond massed study. These effects were increased by presenting birds in pairs so as to highlight differences among families during study (Experiment 1). Self-allocated study time provided evidence that more attention was paid during spaced than during massed study and resulted in no age differences in learning (Experiment 2). Metacognitive measures revealed sensitivity to the processing advantage of spaced study and to differences in classification difficulty across categories. No difference occurred in monitoring accuracy for young versus older adults. These findings provide evidence for discrimination- and attention-based accounts of the spacing effect in natural concept learning.
- Adams, C. (1991). Qualitative age differences in memory for text: A lifespan developmental perspective. Psychology and Aging, 6, 323–336. CrossRef
- Castel, A. D. (2005). Memory for grocery prices in younger and older adults: The role of schematic support. Psychology and Aging, 20, 718–721. CrossRef
- Castel, A. D. (2008). The adaptive and strategic use of memory by older adults: Evaluative processing and value-directed remembering. In A. S. Benjamin & B. H. Ross (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 48, pp. 225–270). London: Academic Press.
- Castel, A. D., Farb, N., & Craik, F. I. M. (2007). Memory for general and specific value information in younger and older adults: Measuring the limits of strategic control. Memory & Cognition, 35, 689–700. CrossRef
- Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 354–380. CrossRef
- Craik, F. I. M. (2002). Human memory and aging. In L. Bäckman & C. von Hofsten (Eds.), Psychology at the turn of the millennium (pp. 261–280). Hove, U.K.: Psychology Press.
- Dempster, F. N. (1996). Distributing and managing the conditions of encoding and practice. In E. L. Bjork & R. A. Bjork (Eds.), Memory (pp. 317–344). San Diego: Academic Press. CrossRef
- Dunlosky, J., & Connor, L. T. (1997). Age differences in the allocation of study time account for age differences in memory performance. Memory & Cognition, 25, 691–700. CrossRef
- Dunlosky, J., & Hertzog, C. (2000). Updating knowledge about strategy effectiveness: A componential analysis of learning about strategy effectiveness from task experience. Psychology & Aging, 15, 462–474. CrossRef
- Dunlosky, J., & Hertzog, C. (2001). Measuring strategy production during associative learning: The relative utility of concurrent versus retrospective reports. Memory & Cognition, 29, 247–253. CrossRef
- Gagné, R. M. (1950). The effect of sequence of presentation of similar items on the learning of paired-associates. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40, 61–73. CrossRef
- Griego, J. A., & Kliegel, M. (2008). Adult age differences in function concept learning. Aging, Neuropsychology, & Cognition, 15, 1–30. CrossRef
- Hess, T. M., & Slaughter, S. J. (1986). Aging effects on prototype abstraction and concept identification. Journal of Gerontology, 41, 214–221.
- Jacoby, L. L., Wahlheim, C. N., & Coane, J. H. (2010). Test-enhanced learning of natural concepts: Effects on recognition memory, classification, and metacognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 36, 1441–1451. CrossRef
- Kornell, N., & Bjork, R. A. (2008). Learning concepts and categories: Is spacing the “enemy of induction”? Psychological Science, 19, 585–592. CrossRef
- Kornell, N., Castel, A. D., Eich, T. S., & Bjork, R. A. (2010). Spacing as the friend of both memory and induction in young and older adults. Psychology and Aging, 25, 498–503. CrossRef
- Koutstaal, W. (2003). Older adults encode—but do not always use—perceptual details: Intentional versus unintentional effects of detail on memory judgments. Psychological Science, 14, 189–193. CrossRef
- Kurtz, K. H., & Hovland, C. I. (1956). Concept learning with differing sequences of instances. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51, 239–243. CrossRef
- Nelson, T. O. (1984). A comparison of current measures of the accuracy of feeling-of-knowing predictions. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 109–133. CrossRef
- Nelson, T. O., & Leonesio, R. J. (1988). Allocation of self-paced study time and the “labor-in-vain effect”. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 676–686. CrossRef
- Salthouse, T. A. (1996). The processing-speed theory of adult age differences in cognition. Psychological Review, 103, 403–428. CrossRef
- Sibley, D. A. (2002). Sibley’s birding basics. Toledo, Spain: Knopf.
- Spacing enhances the learning of natural concepts: an investigation of mechanisms, metacognition, and aging
Memory & Cognition
Volume 39, Issue 5 , pp 750-763
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Additional Links
- Concept learning
- Spacing effects
- Industry Sectors