Equating total consolidation time across presentation methods equalizes forgetting rates (Experiment 3)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? When free time between sequential items was removed so consolidation time was equated, the Presentation Method x Retention-Interval Duration interaction was not significant. → Ricker Timothy J. 2014
Evidence¶
Ricker Timothy J. 2014¶
Ricker Timothy J., Cowan Nelson. (2014). Differences between Presentation Methods in Working Memory Procedures: A Matter of Working Memory Consolidation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034301
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Experiment 3 with 30 college students removed the blank periods between sequential items, holding presentation, encoding, and consolidation time constant across methods. The interaction "F(2,56)= 1.11, p=.34" was not significant; Cowan's k showed similar forgetting (0.41 sequential vs. 0.45 simultaneous items).
"unlike Experiments 1 and 2, in this experiment there was no interaction of Presentation Method with Retention-Interval Duration, F(2,56)= 1.11, p=.34, indicating that the rate of time-based forgetting was similar for sequential and simultaneous presentation methods"
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Long-Term Memory — outcome: instruction changes it
Related Claims¶
- Equating encoding time across presentation methods does not eliminate the forgetting-rate difference (Experiment 2) — related
- Lengthening consolidation time in the simultaneous condition reduces forgetting to a rate comparable to sequential presentation (Experiment 4) — related
- Time-based forgetting occurs across presentation methods, with rate determined by consolidation time — a broader claim this one bears on
- Sequential presentation of memory items produces less time-based forgetting than simultaneous presentation (Experiment 1) — related
- Presentation format (sequential vs. simultaneous) does not reliably affect EOL accuracy — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
consolidation-time-equation-equalizes-forgetting |
title |
Equating total consolidation time across presentation methods equalizes forgetting rates (Experiment 3) |
description |
Equating total consolidation time across presentation methods equalizes forgetting rates (Experiment 3) |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2014 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-17 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — ricker-timothy-j-2014 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.