预测试效果是针对特定目标的,而不是由普遍的好奇心所驱动的。

IF 2.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Timothy J Hollins, Tina Seabrooke, Angus Inkster, Andy Wills, Chris J Mitchell
{"title":"预测试效果是针对特定目标的,而不是由普遍的好奇心所驱动的。","authors":"Timothy J Hollins,&nbsp;Tina Seabrooke,&nbsp;Angus Inkster,&nbsp;Andy Wills,&nbsp;Chris J Mitchell","doi":"10.1080/09658211.2022.2153141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Guessing an answer to an unfamiliar question prior to seeing the answer leads to better memory than studying alone (the <i>pre-testing effect</i>), which some theories attribute to increased curiosity. A similar effect occurs in general knowledge learning: people are more likely to recall information that they were initially curious to learn. Gruber and Ranganath [(2019). How curiosity enhances hippocampus-dependent memory: The prediction, appraisal, curiosity, and exploration (PACE) framework. <i>Trends in Cognitive Sciences</i>, <i>23</i>(12), 1014-1025] argued that unanswered questions can cause a <i>state</i> of curiosity during which encoding is enhanced for the missing answer, but also for incidental information presented at the time. If pre-testing similarly induces curiosity, then it too should produce better memory for incidental information. We tested this idea in three experiments that varied the order, nature and timing of the incidental material presented within a pre-testing context. All three experiments demonstrated a reliable pre-testing effect for the targets, but no benefit for the incidental material presented before the target. This pattern suggests that the pre-testing effect is highly specific and is not consistent with a generalised state of curiosity.</p>","PeriodicalId":18569,"journal":{"name":"Memory","volume":"31 2","pages":"282-296"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pre-testing effects are target-specific and are not driven by a generalised state of curiosity.\",\"authors\":\"Timothy J Hollins,&nbsp;Tina Seabrooke,&nbsp;Angus Inkster,&nbsp;Andy Wills,&nbsp;Chris J Mitchell\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09658211.2022.2153141\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Guessing an answer to an unfamiliar question prior to seeing the answer leads to better memory than studying alone (the <i>pre-testing effect</i>), which some theories attribute to increased curiosity. A similar effect occurs in general knowledge learning: people are more likely to recall information that they were initially curious to learn. Gruber and Ranganath [(2019). How curiosity enhances hippocampus-dependent memory: The prediction, appraisal, curiosity, and exploration (PACE) framework. <i>Trends in Cognitive Sciences</i>, <i>23</i>(12), 1014-1025] argued that unanswered questions can cause a <i>state</i> of curiosity during which encoding is enhanced for the missing answer, but also for incidental information presented at the time. If pre-testing similarly induces curiosity, then it too should produce better memory for incidental information. We tested this idea in three experiments that varied the order, nature and timing of the incidental material presented within a pre-testing context. All three experiments demonstrated a reliable pre-testing effect for the targets, but no benefit for the incidental material presented before the target. This pattern suggests that the pre-testing effect is highly specific and is not consistent with a generalised state of curiosity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18569,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Memory\",\"volume\":\"31 2\",\"pages\":\"282-296\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Memory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2022.2153141\",\"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","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2022.2153141","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

在看到一个不熟悉的问题的答案之前猜测答案比单独学习更能提高记忆力(预测试效应),一些理论将其归因于好奇心的增强。在一般知识学习中也会出现类似的效果:人们更有可能回忆起他们最初好奇学习的信息。格鲁伯和兰加纳特[(2019)]。好奇心如何增强海马体依赖记忆:预测、评价、好奇心和探索(PACE)框架。《认知科学趋势》(Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(12), 1014-1025)认为,未回答的问题会导致一种好奇的状态,在这种状态下,对缺失的答案的编码会增强,对当时出现的偶然信息的编码也会增强。如果预先测试类似地引起好奇心,那么它也应该对附带信息产生更好的记忆。我们在三个实验中测试了这个想法,这些实验改变了在预测试环境中出现的附带材料的顺序、性质和时间。所有三个实验都证明了对目标有可靠的预测试效果,但对在目标之前呈现的附带材料没有好处。这种模式表明,预测试效应是高度特异性的,与普遍的好奇心状态不一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pre-testing effects are target-specific and are not driven by a generalised state of curiosity.

Guessing an answer to an unfamiliar question prior to seeing the answer leads to better memory than studying alone (the pre-testing effect), which some theories attribute to increased curiosity. A similar effect occurs in general knowledge learning: people are more likely to recall information that they were initially curious to learn. Gruber and Ranganath [(2019). How curiosity enhances hippocampus-dependent memory: The prediction, appraisal, curiosity, and exploration (PACE) framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(12), 1014-1025] argued that unanswered questions can cause a state of curiosity during which encoding is enhanced for the missing answer, but also for incidental information presented at the time. If pre-testing similarly induces curiosity, then it too should produce better memory for incidental information. We tested this idea in three experiments that varied the order, nature and timing of the incidental material presented within a pre-testing context. All three experiments demonstrated a reliable pre-testing effect for the targets, but no benefit for the incidental material presented before the target. This pattern suggests that the pre-testing effect is highly specific and is not consistent with a generalised state of curiosity.

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
Memory PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
79
期刊介绍: Memory publishes high quality papers in all areas of memory research. This includes experimental studies of memory (including laboratory-based research, everyday memory studies, and applied memory research), developmental, educational, neuropsychological, clinical and social research on memory. By representing all significant areas of memory research, the journal cuts across the traditional distinctions of psychological research. Memory therefore provides a unique venue for memory researchers to communicate their findings and ideas both to peers within their own research tradition in the study of memory, and also to the wider range of research communities with direct interest in human memory.
×
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