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¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 1980 · checked against its sources 2026-10-19 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? After a short retention interval, recall of between-lists repeated words with 0-day spacing (.42) exceeded recall of words with 7-day spacing (.24); after a 7-day retention interval this reversed, with .06 vs .14. → Glenberg 1980

Evidence¶

Glenberg 1980¶

Glenberg, A. M., & Lehmann, T. S. (1980). Spacing repetitions over 1 week. Memory & Cognition, 8(6), 528-538. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03213772

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Experiment 1, a controlled incidental-learning experiment with 48 subjects in four between-subjects conditions (0-0, 0-7, 7-0, 7-7), free recall tested. The spacing x retention interval interaction was significant [F(1,44) = 25.72], showing "significantly greater than recall" for short spacing at short retention intervals and the reverse at long retention intervals.

"After a a-day retention inter­val, recall of items with a-day between-lists spacings (.42) was significantly greater than recall of items with 7-day between-lists spacings (.24) [t(22) =4.06, SE = 1.37]. After a 7-day retention interval, recall after a-day between-lists spacings (.06) was significantly inferior to recall after 7-day between-lists spacings (.14) [t(22) = -3.11, SE = .78]."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Recall of between-lists repeated words matched two-independent-representations predictions at short retention intervals but exceeded independence after long retention intervals — related
• When the orienting task prevented interitem associations, the within-list lag effect was attenuated after long retention intervals and this attenuation was not a floor effect — related
• A within-list lag effect persisted at all retention intervals (up to 7 days) when the orienting task allowed interitem associations, contrary to what a context-only retrieval account predicts for that condition — related
• Spaced Practice Improves Retention — a broader claim this one bears on
• 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 — related
• In continuous recognition memory, the lag function is inverted U-shaped after a short retention interval and monotonically increasing after a long retention interval — related
• The spacing benefit holds even at very short retention intervals, contradicting the Peterson paradox — reports the opposite