Studying a word list in two different rooms yields about 40% more recall than studying it twice in the same room when tested in a new room¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · theoretical r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 1979 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Subjects who studied the same list in two different rooms recalled an average of 40% more words than subjects who studied it twice in the same context, illustrating differential storage of environmental contextual components. → Glenberg 1979

Evidence¶

Glenberg 1979¶

Glenberg, A. M. (1979). Component-levels theory of the effects of spacing of repetitions on recall and recognition. Memory & Cognition, 7(2), 95-112. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03197590

q2 · i? · theoretical · r3

The review reports S. M. Smith et al. (1978): the same list was studied in two sessions 3 h apart, in the same room or two different rooms, with recall tested 3 h later in a room new to all subjects. The printed comparison is the 40% recall advantage; no standardized effect size is printed.

"Those subjects who studied the list in two different rooms recalled an average of 40% more words than the subjects who studied the list of words twice in the same context."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Encoding variability across varied example contexts produces decontextualization supporting transfer (review reports DiVesta and Peverly) — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
• Eliminating differential storage of structural components reduces the free-recall spacing effect at moderate to long lags — related
• Recall of words repeated across lists spaced up to 1 week follows a proportionality rule: recall is better after short spacing at short retention intervals but better after long spacing at long retention intervals — related