Andy L. Fordyce, Thomas S. Redick, Joseph P. Bedwell, Jeffrey D. Karpicke
{"title":"工作记忆的个体差异与检索练习的益处","authors":"Andy L. Fordyce, Thomas S. Redick, Joseph P. Bedwell, Jeffrey D. Karpicke","doi":"10.1016/j.jml.2025.104664","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Previous research on the association between individual differences in working memory and the benefit of retrieval practice has yielded mixed results, with various studies showing no differential retrieval practice benefit as a function of working memory ability, and others finding either more or less retrieval practice benefit for individuals lower in working memory. The current studies addressed how (a) variations in the learning task procedure and (b) measurement of working memory might influence the presence and/or strength of the relationship between working memory and retrieval practice. To ensure high initial retrieval success in Experiments 1 and 2, we used a learning-to-criterion procedure which had not been used in previous retrieval practice studies that examined individual differences. Experiment 3 extended the results of Experiments 1 and 2 to different learning task materials, while attempting to replicate a previous study that had shown a specific retrieval practice benefit for individuals with lower working memory. Additionally, separate analyses were conducted using partial and absolute scoring methods for operation span to address variability in previous research. Across all three experiments, retrieval practice outperformed restudying, and this benefit held regardless of individual differences in working memory ability.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16493,"journal":{"name":"Journal of memory and language","volume":"144 ","pages":"Article 104664"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Individual differences in working memory and the benefit of retrieval practice\",\"authors\":\"Andy L. Fordyce, Thomas S. Redick, Joseph P. Bedwell, Jeffrey D. Karpicke\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jml.2025.104664\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Previous research on the association between individual differences in working memory and the benefit of retrieval practice has yielded mixed results, with various studies showing no differential retrieval practice benefit as a function of working memory ability, and others finding either more or less retrieval practice benefit for individuals lower in working memory. The current studies addressed how (a) variations in the learning task procedure and (b) measurement of working memory might influence the presence and/or strength of the relationship between working memory and retrieval practice. To ensure high initial retrieval success in Experiments 1 and 2, we used a learning-to-criterion procedure which had not been used in previous retrieval practice studies that examined individual differences. Experiment 3 extended the results of Experiments 1 and 2 to different learning task materials, while attempting to replicate a previous study that had shown a specific retrieval practice benefit for individuals with lower working memory. Additionally, separate analyses were conducted using partial and absolute scoring methods for operation span to address variability in previous research. Across all three experiments, retrieval practice outperformed restudying, and this benefit held regardless of individual differences in working memory ability.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16493,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of memory and language\",\"volume\":\"144 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104664\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of memory and language\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749596X25000579\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of memory and language","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749596X25000579","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Individual differences in working memory and the benefit of retrieval practice
Previous research on the association between individual differences in working memory and the benefit of retrieval practice has yielded mixed results, with various studies showing no differential retrieval practice benefit as a function of working memory ability, and others finding either more or less retrieval practice benefit for individuals lower in working memory. The current studies addressed how (a) variations in the learning task procedure and (b) measurement of working memory might influence the presence and/or strength of the relationship between working memory and retrieval practice. To ensure high initial retrieval success in Experiments 1 and 2, we used a learning-to-criterion procedure which had not been used in previous retrieval practice studies that examined individual differences. Experiment 3 extended the results of Experiments 1 and 2 to different learning task materials, while attempting to replicate a previous study that had shown a specific retrieval practice benefit for individuals with lower working memory. Additionally, separate analyses were conducted using partial and absolute scoring methods for operation span to address variability in previous research. Across all three experiments, retrieval practice outperformed restudying, and this benefit held regardless of individual differences in working memory ability.
期刊介绍:
Articles in the Journal of Memory and Language contribute to the formulation of scientific issues and theories in the areas of memory, language comprehension and production, and cognitive processes. Special emphasis is given to research articles that provide new theoretical insights based on a carefully laid empirical foundation. The journal generally favors articles that provide multiple experiments. In addition, significant theoretical papers without new experimental findings may be published.
The Journal of Memory and Language is a valuable tool for cognitive scientists, including psychologists, linguists, and others interested in memory and learning, language, reading, and speech.
Research Areas include:
• Topics that illuminate aspects of memory or language processing
• Linguistics
• Neuropsychology.