工作记忆的个体差异与检索练习的益处

IF 2.9 1区 心理学 Q1 LINGUISTICS
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,&nbsp;Thomas S. Redick,&nbsp;Joseph P. Bedwell,&nbsp;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,&nbsp;Thomas S. Redick,&nbsp;Joseph P. Bedwell,&nbsp;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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

之前关于工作记忆的个体差异与检索练习的益处之间的关系的研究得出了不同的结果,有各种各样的研究表明,不同的检索练习对工作记忆能力没有作用,而其他研究则发现,对工作记忆较差的个体来说,更多或更少的检索练习有益。目前的研究解决了(a)学习任务过程的变化和(b)工作记忆的测量如何影响工作记忆和检索练习之间关系的存在和/或强度。为了确保实验1和2中较高的初始检索成功率,我们使用了一种从学习到标准的程序,这种程序在以前检查个体差异的检索实践研究中没有使用过。实验3将实验1和实验2的结果扩展到不同的学习任务材料,同时试图复制先前的一项研究,该研究表明,特定的检索练习对工作记忆较低的个体有益。此外,使用操作跨度的部分和绝对评分方法进行了单独的分析,以解决先前研究中的可变性。在所有三个实验中,检索练习的表现优于重新学习,而且无论工作记忆能力的个体差异如何,这种好处都是存在的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.
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
CiteScore
8.70
自引率
14.00%
发文量
49
审稿时长
12.7 weeks
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.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信