Descriptive reactivations significantly improve free recall of images compared with distractor and no-reactivation controls¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · 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? Participants given three descriptive reactivations remembered significantly more images than those given distractor reactivations or no reactivation. → MacLeod 2018
Evidence¶
MacLeod 2018¶
MacLeod, S., Reynolds, M. G. & Lehmann, H. (2018). The mitigating effect of repeated memory reactivations on forgetting. npj Science of Learning 3:9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-018-0025-x
q3 · i? · causal · r2
In the 3×4 between-subject ANOVA (n = 167 analyzed after exclusions and trimming) of correctly recalled images, the reactivation main effect was significant, F(3, 155) = 5.50, p = 0.001. Pairwise comparisons showed the Descriptive group beat both controls, "demonstrating mitigated forgetting".
"the participants in the Descriptive group remembered signi ficantly more images than the participants in the Distractor group ( p < 0.001) and the no reactivation Control group (p < 0.05), demonstrating mitigated forgetting."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Component (category-cueing) reactivations mitigate forgetting relative to distractor controls but do not beat no-reactivation controls on image recall — related
- Only descriptive reactivation improves memory precision (correct details per recalled image) — related
- Descriptive reactivations increase correct details recalled; component reactivations increase details only versus distractor — related
- At the 28-day retention interval, both descriptive and component reactivations outperform both controls, with relative gains of 58.8–67.2% for images and over 100% for details — related
- Reactivations do not increase false memories: no reactivation effect on falsely recalled images or details — related
- Retention declines with interval (time-dependent forgetting) across images, details, and details-per-image measures — related
- Weekly brief reactivations during a 30-day retention interval reduce forgetting of numeric facts relative to controls — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
descriptive-reactivation-mitigates-forgetting-images |
title |
Descriptive reactivations significantly improve free recall of images compared with distractor and no-reactivation controls |
description |
Descriptive reactivations significantly improve free recall of images compared with distractor and no-reactivation controls |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2018 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-26 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — macleod-2018 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.