精练编码对联想学习的益处。

IF 2.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Antônio Jaeger, Thuan Henrique Pedrosa Gomes Martins, João Pedro Parreira Rodrigues, Bruno Felipe Barbosa Muniz, Ana Luísa Santiago da Silveira Fonseca, Ariel de Oliveira Gonçalves
{"title":"精练编码对联想学习的益处。","authors":"Antônio Jaeger, Thuan Henrique Pedrosa Gomes Martins, João Pedro Parreira Rodrigues, Bruno Felipe Barbosa Muniz, Ana Luísa Santiago da Silveira Fonseca, Ariel de Oliveira Gonçalves","doi":"10.3758/s13421-024-01671-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The practice of retrieval has been shown to be highly beneficial for memory retention, but it has seldom been compared with learning strategies other than repeated study. Here, we compared the benefits of retrieval practice (without feedback) with the benefits of two elaborative encoding tasks for word pair learning. Specifically, after studying series of randomly combined word pairs, participants performed an interactive-imagery (Experiments 1-2) or sentence-generation task (Experiments 3-5), retrieval practice, and a letter-counting or a rereading task. In Experiments 1-4, the word pairs were shown after a 24-h interval for testing in its original form or with the second word replaced by the second word from another pair, and participants performed recognition (old/new) followed by associative memory tests (intact/rearranged). In Experiment 5, memory was tested in a final cued-recall task administered shortly after initial learning. The interactive-imagery task was as beneficial as retrieval practice for recognition, but consistently more beneficial than retrieval for performance at the associative task. Sentence generation, on the other hand, produced greater performances than retrieval practice in recognition, associative memory, and cued-recall tests. These findings reveal that simple elaborative encoding tasks, such as imagining scenes or generating sentences, can be more beneficial for memory retention than retrieval practice without feedback.</p>","PeriodicalId":48398,"journal":{"name":"Memory & Cognition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The benefits of elaborative encoding over retrieval practice for associative learning.\",\"authors\":\"Antônio Jaeger, Thuan Henrique Pedrosa Gomes Martins, João Pedro Parreira Rodrigues, Bruno Felipe Barbosa Muniz, Ana Luísa Santiago da Silveira Fonseca, Ariel de Oliveira Gonçalves\",\"doi\":\"10.3758/s13421-024-01671-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The practice of retrieval has been shown to be highly beneficial for memory retention, but it has seldom been compared with learning strategies other than repeated study. Here, we compared the benefits of retrieval practice (without feedback) with the benefits of two elaborative encoding tasks for word pair learning. Specifically, after studying series of randomly combined word pairs, participants performed an interactive-imagery (Experiments 1-2) or sentence-generation task (Experiments 3-5), retrieval practice, and a letter-counting or a rereading task. In Experiments 1-4, the word pairs were shown after a 24-h interval for testing in its original form or with the second word replaced by the second word from another pair, and participants performed recognition (old/new) followed by associative memory tests (intact/rearranged). In Experiment 5, memory was tested in a final cued-recall task administered shortly after initial learning. The interactive-imagery task was as beneficial as retrieval practice for recognition, but consistently more beneficial than retrieval for performance at the associative task. Sentence generation, on the other hand, produced greater performances than retrieval practice in recognition, associative memory, and cued-recall tests. These findings reveal that simple elaborative encoding tasks, such as imagining scenes or generating sentences, can be more beneficial for memory retention than retrieval practice without feedback.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48398,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Memory & Cognition\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Memory & Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-024-01671-z\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Memory & Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-024-01671-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

检索练习已被证明对记忆保持非常有益,但除了重复学习之外,很少将其与学习策略进行比较。在这里,我们比较了检索练习(无反馈)和两种精细编码任务对单词对学习的好处。具体来说,在研究了一系列随机组合的单词对之后,参与者进行了互动意象(实验1-2)或句子生成任务(实验3-5),检索练习,以及字母计数或重读任务。在实验1-4中,每隔24小时对单词对进行原单词对和新单词对替换后的联想记忆测试,参与者先进行识别(旧/新),然后进行联想记忆测试(完整/重新排列)。在实验5中,在初始学习后不久进行的最后提示回忆任务中测试了记忆。交互意象任务与检索练习对识别的好处是一样的,但始终比检索对联想任务的表现更有益。另一方面,句子生成在识别、联想记忆和线索回忆测试中比检索练习产生了更好的表现。这些发现表明,简单的精细编码任务,如想象场景或生成句子,比没有反馈的检索练习更有利于记忆保留。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The benefits of elaborative encoding over retrieval practice for associative learning.

The practice of retrieval has been shown to be highly beneficial for memory retention, but it has seldom been compared with learning strategies other than repeated study. Here, we compared the benefits of retrieval practice (without feedback) with the benefits of two elaborative encoding tasks for word pair learning. Specifically, after studying series of randomly combined word pairs, participants performed an interactive-imagery (Experiments 1-2) or sentence-generation task (Experiments 3-5), retrieval practice, and a letter-counting or a rereading task. In Experiments 1-4, the word pairs were shown after a 24-h interval for testing in its original form or with the second word replaced by the second word from another pair, and participants performed recognition (old/new) followed by associative memory tests (intact/rearranged). In Experiment 5, memory was tested in a final cued-recall task administered shortly after initial learning. The interactive-imagery task was as beneficial as retrieval practice for recognition, but consistently more beneficial than retrieval for performance at the associative task. Sentence generation, on the other hand, produced greater performances than retrieval practice in recognition, associative memory, and cued-recall tests. These findings reveal that simple elaborative encoding tasks, such as imagining scenes or generating sentences, can be more beneficial for memory retention than retrieval practice without feedback.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Memory & Cognition
Memory & Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.30%
发文量
112
期刊介绍: Memory & Cognition covers human memory and learning, conceptual processes, psycholinguistics, problem solving, thinking, decision making, and skilled performance, including relevant work in the areas of computer simulation, information processing, mathematical psychology, developmental psychology, and experimental social psychology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信