Advertisement

Memory & Cognition

, Volume 46, Issue 8, pp 1376–1388 | Cite as

Examining the contributions of desirable difficulty and reminding to the spacing effect

  • Geoffrey B. Maddox
  • Mary A. Pyc
  • Zachary S. Kauffman
  • Jessica D. Gatewood
  • Aubrey M. Schonhoff
Article
  • 83 Downloads

Abstract

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.

Keywords

Spacing effect Desirable difficulty Reminding Encoding variability 

Notes

Author Note

Portions of this work were supported by NIA Training Grant AG00030 awarded to David Balota.

References

  1. Appleton-Knapp, S., Bjork, R. A., & Wickens, T. D. (2005). Examining the spacing effect in advertising: Encoding variability, retrieval processes and their interaction. Journal of Consumer Research, 32, 266–276.  https://doi.org/10.1086/432236 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 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
  3. 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
  4. Benjamin, A. S., & Tullis, J. G. (2010). What makes distributed practice effective? Cognitive Psychology, 61, 228–247.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2010.05.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 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
  6. 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.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.354 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Crowder, R. G. (1976). Principles of learning and memory. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  8. Delaney, P. F., Verkoeijen, P. P. J. L., & Spirgel, A. (2010). Spacing and testing effects: A deeply critical, lengthy, and at times discursive review of the literature. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 53, 63–147.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(10)53003-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 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.  https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012102570-0/50011-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ebbinghaus, H. (1885). Uber das Gedachtnis. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
  11. Faust, M. E., Balota, D. A., Spieler, D. H., & Ferraro, F. R. (1999). Individual differences in information processing rate and amount: Implications for group differences in response latency. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 777–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fritz, M. S., Taylor, A. B., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2012). Explanation of two anomalous results in statistical mediation analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47, 61–87.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2012.640596 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Glenberg, A. M. (1979). Component-levels theory of the effects of spacing of repetitions on recall and recognition. Memory& Cognition, 7, 95–112.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197590 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Glover, J. A. (1989). The “testing” phenomenon: Not gone but nearly forgotten. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 392–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Greene, R. L. (1989). Spacing effects in memory: Evidence for a twoprocess account. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 371–377.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.15.3.371 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Greeno, J. G. (1967). Paired-associate learning with short term retention: Mathematical analysis and data regarding identification of parameters. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 4, 430–472.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(67)90033-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hintzman, D. L. (2004). Judgment of frequency versus recognition confidence: Repetition and recursive reminding. Memory & Cognition, 32, 336–350.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196863 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hintzman, D. L. (2010). How does repetition affect memory? Evidence from judgments of recency. Memory & Cognition, 38, 102–115.  https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.38.1.102 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hintzman, D. L., Summers, J. J., & Block, R. A. (1975). Spacing judgments as an index of study-phase retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1, 31–40.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.1.1.31 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jacoby, L. L. (1974). The role of mental contiguity in memory: Registration and retrieval effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 483–496.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(74)80001-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jacoby, L. L., & Wahlheim, C. N. (2013). On the importance of looking back: The role of recursive remindings in recency judgments and cued recall. Memory & Cognition, 41, 625–637.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-013-0298-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jacoby, L. L., Wahlheim, C. N., & Yonelinas, A. P. (2013). The role of detection and recollection of change in list discrimination. Memory & Cognition, 41, 638–649.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-013-0313-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kahana, M. J. (2012). Foundations of human memory. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. 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/10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.704 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kenny, D. A., & Judd, C. M. (2013). Power anomalies in testing mediation. Psychological Science, 25, 334–339.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0956767613502676 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Logan, J. M., & Balota, D. A. (2008). Expanded vs equal spaced retrieval practice in healthy young and older adults. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 15, 257–280.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13825580701322171 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., & Williams, J. (2004). Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39, 99–128.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr3901_4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 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
  29. Maddox, G. B., & Balota, D. A. (2015). Retrieval practice and spacing effects in and young and older adults: An examination of the benefits of desirable difficulty. Memory& Cognition, 45(5), 760–774.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-014-0499-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Madigan, S. A. (1969). Intraserial repetition and coding processes in free recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 8, 828–835.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(69)80050-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Melton, A. W. (1970). The situation with respect to the spacing of repetitions and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 9, 596–606.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(70)80107-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Merkow, M. B., Burke, J. F., & Kahana, M. J. (2015). The human hippocampus contributes to both the recollection and familiarity components of recognition memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112, 14378–14383.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1513145112 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 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
  34. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 717–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pyc, M. A., & Rawson, K. A. (2009). Testing the retrieval effort hypothesis: Does greater difficulty correctly recalling information lead to higher levels of memory? Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 437–447.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2009.01.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Raaijmakers, J. G. W. (2003). Spacing and repetition effects in human memory: Application of the SAM model. Cognitive Science, 27, 431–452.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0364-0213(03)00007-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). The power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 181–210.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00012.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rundus, D. (1971). Analysis of rehearsal processes in free recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 89, 63–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Slamecka, N. J., & Barlow, W. (1979). The role of semantic and surface features in word repetition effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 617–627.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(79)90344-X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Slamecka, N. J., & Graf, P. (1978). The generation effect: Delineation of a phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4, 592–604.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.4.6.592 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Soderstrom, N. C., Kerr, T. K., & Bjork, R. A. (2016). The critical importance of retrieval – and spacing – for learning. Psychological Science, 27, 223–230.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615617778 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Thios, S. J., & D’Agostino, P. R. (1976). Effects of repetition as a function of study-phase retrieval. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15, 529–536.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5371(76)90047-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 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
  44. Verkoeijen, P. P. J. L., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Schmidt, H. G. (2004). Detrimental influence of contextual change on spacing effects in free recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 796–800.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.30.4.796 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 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/10.1027/1618-3169.52.4.257 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wahlheim, C. N., Maddox, G. B., & Jacoby, L. L. (2014). The role of reminding in the effects of spaced repetitions on cued recall: Sufficient but not necessary. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 94–105.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034055 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wiseman, W., & Ishai, A. (2008). Recollection- and familiarity-based decisions reflect memory strength. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, 2, 1–9.  https://doi.org/10.3389/neuro.06.001.2008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Woodruf, C. C., Hayama, H. R., & Rugg, M. D. (2006). Electrophysiological dissociation of the neural correlates of recollection and familiarity. Brain Research, 1100(1), 125–135.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2006.05.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Geoffrey B. Maddox
    • 1
  • Mary A. Pyc
    • 2
  • Zachary S. Kauffman
    • 1
  • Jessica D. Gatewood
    • 1
  • Aubrey M. Schonhoff
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyRhodes CollegeMemphisUSA
  2. 2.Dart NeuroScience, LLCSan DiegoUSA

Personalised recommendations