Recognition performance was worse overall in Experiment 2 than Experiment 1, with no moderation of the effects of interest¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 Participants performed worse at the recognition test in Experiment 2 compared to Experiment 1, but the PE × outcome effect did not differ between experiments. → Francesco Pupillo 2023

Evidence¶

Francesco Pupillo 2023¶

Francesco Pupillo, Javier Ortiz-Tudela, Rasmus Bruckner and Yee Lee Shing. (2023). The effect of prediction error on episodic memory encoding is modulated by the outcome of the predictions. npj Science of Learning 8:18. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-023-00166-x

q3 · i3 · causal · r2

Fixed effect of experiment in the collapsed mixed-model analysis; Experiment 2 was run online with encoding ~24 h after learning. The article reports "β = −0.63, p = 0.002, OR = 0.53" and that all interactions including experiment were non-significant, ps > 0.204.

"There was also a significant main effect of the experiment, χ2 ð1Þ = 9.91, with participants performing worse overall at the recognition test in Experiment 2, compared to Experiment 1, β = −0.63, p = 0.002, OR = 0.53."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Interest — moderator: an instructional effect differs with it

Related Claims¶

• The overall main effect of prediction error on recognition memory, independent of prediction outcome, is not significant — related
• Model-derived prediction error at encoding interacts with prediction outcome in determining subsequent recognition memory — related
• Estimated individual learning rates did not affect overall recognition memory or moderate the prediction-error effects — related