Judging words as likely to be forgotten enhanced their recall relative to unselected words under simultaneous presentation with fixed or self-paced study time¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r1–r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 In Experiment 1a (fixed 30-s study), words predicted to be forgotten were recalled better than words not given a prediction (d = 0.70). → Dillon H. Murphy 2023 q3 i2 In Experiment 1b (self-paced study), the forget-word advantage over unselected words replicated (d = 0.45). → Dillon H. Murphy 2023 (2)

Evidence¶

Dillon H. Murphy 2023¶

Dillon H. Murphy, Vered Halamish, Matthew G. Rhodes, & Alan D. Castel. (2023). How evaluating memorability can lead to Unintended Consequences. Metacognition and Learning (2023) 18:375–403. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-023-09332-3

q3 · i2 · causal · r1

Online experiment with 48 UCLA undergraduates studying four 16-word lists for 30 s, selecting two remember and two forget words per list before immediate free recall. Forget words (M = 0.52) beat unselected words (M = 0.29), "[ pholm < 0.001, d = 0.70]".

"Critically, recall was better for words expected to be forgotten than words not selected to be remembered or forgotten [ pholm < 0.001, d = 0.70]."

Dillon H. Murphy 2023 (2)¶

Dillon H. Murphy, Vered Halamish, Matthew G. Rhodes, & Alan D. Castel. (2023). How evaluating memorability can lead to Unintended Consequences. Metacognition and Learning (2023) 18:375–403. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-023-09332-3

q3 · i2 · causal · r2

Self-paced replication with 62 undergraduates (mean 97.16 s per list). Forget words (M = 0.63) again exceeded unselected words (M = 0.49), "[ pholm < 0.001, d = 0.45]", showing the effect persists when study time is self-paced.

"Critically, recall was better for the words expected to be forgotten than words not selected as to be remembered or forgotten [ pholm < 0.001, d = 0.45]."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• When the number of remember, forget, and unselected words was equated, words predicted to be forgotten were recalled similarly to unselected words — reports the opposite
• When every word was judged, words circled as to-be-remembered were recalled better and words underlined as to-be-forgotten worse than a no-instruction control group's recall — related
• Words participants said they would remember were recalled earlier in output than words predicted to be forgotten or words not given a prediction — related
• Under sequential presentation with Likert ratings for every word, no memory benefit emerged for items judged likely to be forgotten; negative ratings predicted the poorest recall — reports the opposite
• In self-cued directed forgetting, selected words were better recalled than unselected words regardless of whether they were designated to-be-remembered or to-be-forgotten — related
• Relative to random choice, a metacognitive judgment of remembering boosted recall while a judgment of forgetting was associated with a memory cost — related
• Merely selecting words by clicking on them, without any memorability instructions, enhanced their recall (a choice effect) — related
• For a fixed quantity of information, the mere pace of information presentation can affect learning performance — related