The Costs and Benefits of Testing and Guessing on Recognition Memory

Autor/inn/en	Huff, Mark J.; Balota, David A.; Hutchison, Keith A.
Titel	The Costs and Benefits of Testing and Guessing on Recognition Memory
Quelle	In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42 (2016) 10, S.1559-1572 (14 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0278-7393
DOI	10.1037/xlm0000269
Schlagwörter	Testing; Guessing (Tests); Memory; Retention (Psychology); Cues; Statistical Analysis; Recall (Psychology); Semantics; Comparative Analysis; Bayesian Statistics; Recognition (Psychology); Control Groups; Cost Effectiveness; Paired Associate Learning; Word Lists + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Testdurchführung; Testen; Erraten; Gedächtnis; Merkfähigkeit; Stichwort; Statistische Analyse; Abberufung; Semantik; Recognition; Wiedererkennen; Kosten-Nutzen-Analyse; Kosten-Nutzen-Denken; Wortliste
Abstract	We examined whether 2 types of interpolated tasks (i.e., retrieval-practice via free recall or guessing a missing critical item) improved final recognition for related and unrelated word lists relative to restudying or completing a filler task. Both retrieval-practice and guessing tasks improved correct recognition relative to restudy and filler tasks, particularly when study lists were semantically related. However, both retrieval practice and guessing also generally inflated false recognition for the nonpresented critical words. These patterns were found when final recognition was completed during a short delay within the same experimental session (Experiment 1) and after a 24-hr delay (Experiment 2). In Experiment 3, task instructions were presented randomly after each list to determine whether retrieval-practice and guessing effects were influenced by task-expectancy processes. In contrast to Experiments 1 and 2, final recognition after retrieval practice and guessing was equivalent to restudy, suggesting that the observed retrieval-practice and guessing advantages were in part because of preparatory task-based processing during study. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	American Psychological Association. Journals Department, 750 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20002. Tel: 800-374-2721; Tel: 202-336-5510; Fax: 202-336-5502; e-mail: order@apa.org; Web site: http://www.apa.org
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01