Examining the contributions of desirable difficulty and reminding to the spacing effect
- 83 Downloads
Although substantial evidence indicates that spacing repeated study events with intervening material generally enhances memory performance relative to massing study events, the mechanism underlying this benefit is less clear. Two experiments examined the role of reminding difficulty during the acquisition of material in modulating final memory performance for spaced repetitions utilizing recognition (Experiment 1) and recall tests (Experiment 2). Specifically, participants studied a list of words presented one or two times separated by one or five items. On each trial participants reported whether the item had been previously presented (i.e., repetition detection judgment), and the response latency served as a proxy for reminding difficulty such that longer response latencies reflected more difficult reminding. A third experiment extended this paradigm with the inclusion of a massed condition and novel lag conditions (three and ten items). Results revealed significant lag effects in final test performance across experiments despite comparable repetition detection difficulty between lag conditions during acquisition. Moreover, results from within-participant point-biserial analyses and mediation analyses converged on overall performance measures in suggesting that repetition detection difficulty failed to modulate final test performance in the current paradigm. Discussion considers the implications of the current results for mechanisms proposed to underlie the benefits of spaced study and spaced retrieval practice.
KeywordsSpacing effect Desirable difficulty Reminding Encoding variability
Portions of this work were supported by NIA Training Grant AG00030 awarded to David Balota.
- Balota, D. A., Duchek, J. M., & Logan, J. M. (2007a). Is expanded retrieval practice a superior form of spaced retrieval? A critical review of the extent literature. To appear in Nairne, J.S. (Ed.), The foundations of remembering: Essays in honor of Henry L. Roediger III. Chapter 6, pp. 83–105.Google Scholar
- Balota, D. A., Yap, M. J., Cortese, M. J., Hutchison, K. I., Kessler, B., Loftis, B., ... Treiman, R. (2007b). The English Lexicon Project. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 445–459.Google Scholar
- Bjork, R. A. (1994). Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. In J. Metcalfe & A. P. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 185–205). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Crowder, R. G. (1976). Principles of learning and memory. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Ebbinghaus, H. (1885). Uber das Gedachtnis. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
- Kahana, M. J. (2012). Foundations of human memory. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger III, H. L. (2007). Expanding retrieval practice promotes short-term retention, but equally spaced retrieval promotes long-term retention. Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition, 33, 704–719. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7318.104.22.1684 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Maddox, G. B. (2016). Understanding the underlying mechanism of the spacing effect in verbal learning: A case for encoding variability and study phase retrieval. Journal of Cognitive Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2016.1181637
- Montoya, A. K., & Hayes, A. F. (2017). Two condition within-participant statistical mediation analysis: A path-analytic framework. Psychological Methods, 22(1), 6–27.Google Scholar
- Tullis, J. G., Benjamin, A. S., & Ross, B. H. (2014). The reminding effect: Presentation of associates enhances memory for related words in a list. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036036
- Verkoeijen, P. P. J. L., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Schmidt, H. G. (2005). Limitations to the spacing effect: Demonstration of an inverted Ushaped relationship between interreptition spacing and free recall. Experimental Psychology, 52, 257–263. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-322.214.171.1247 CrossRefGoogle Scholar