Whether initial retrieval practice enhances semantic organization in final free recall is unclear, with results that may depend on how retrieval practice is implemented¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (3 entries) · review r2–r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The chapter reports, citing Zaromb and Roediger (2010) and Congleton and Rajaram (2012), that initial free recall practice enhanced final semantic organization. → Karpicke 2017 q2 i? The chapter reports, citing Peterson and Mulligan, that initial cued recall retrieval practice produced lower semantic clustering scores than restudy. → Karpicke 2017 (2) q2 i? The chapter reports, citing Whiffen and Karpicke (2017), that list discrimination retrieval practice produced lower semantic organization scores than restudy. → Karpicke 2017 (3)

Evidence¶

Karpicke 2017¶

Karpicke, J. D. (2017). Retrieval-Based Learning: A Decade of Progress. Learning and Memory: A Comprehensive Reference, 2nd edition, Volume 2. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809324-5.21055-9

q2 · i? · review · r2

The chapter reports studies using categorized lists in which subjects practiced initial free recall: they "found that initial retrieval practice enhanced final semantic organization".

"Zaromb and Roediger (2010) and Congleton and Rajaram (2012) found that initial retrieval practice enhanced final semantic organization."

Karpicke 2017 (2)¶

Karpicke, J. D. (2017). Retrieval-Based Learning: A Decade of Progress. Learning and Memory: A Comprehensive Reference, 2nd edition, Volume 2. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809324-5.21055-9

q2 · i? · review · r3

The chapter reports Peterson and Mulligan experiments with word pairs and cued recall practice, "finding that initial retrieval practice produced lower semantic clustering scores relative to restudy conditions"; final recall was also worse.

"Peterson and Mulligan (2013, Experiment 2) and Mulligan and Peterson (2015) obtained contrary results, finding that initial retrieval practice produced lower semantic clustering scores relative to restudy conditions."

Karpicke 2017 (3)¶

Karpicke, J. D. (2017). Retrieval-Based Learning: A Decade of Progress. Learning and Memory: A Comprehensive Reference, 2nd edition, Volume 2. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809324-5.21055-9

q2 · i? · review · r3

The chapter reports Whiffen and Karpicke (2017): "initial retrieval practice with a list discrimination task produced lower scores" on semantic organization measures relative to restudy.

"Whiffen and Karpicke (2017) found that initial retrieval practice with a list discrimination task produced lower scores on measures of semantic organization during final recall, relative to restudy conditions."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Long-Term Memory — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Retrieval practice improves long-term retention — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it

• Existing theoretical accounts attributing the testing effect to enhanced semantic elaboration receive limited support — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it

• Retrieval practice disrupted within-list order reconstruction of eight-item word lists, just as generation did — related
• Initial retrieval conditions that provide less cue support, such as free recall rather than recognition or fewer letter cues, tend to produce better retention despite lower initial success — related
• Inducing learners to recollect the prior study episode during retrieval practice enhances retention even when reexposure and initial success are held constant — related
• Retrieval practice enhances final-test recollection of contextual details and speeds final retrieval, as shown by list discrimination, response time, and cumulative recall measures — related
• There is currently no direct empirical connection established between teachers' learning about retrieval practice and their classroom implementation of it — related