Repeated retrieval practice alters the rate at which learned items are forgotten, according to learn-to-criterion studies and forgetting-curve analyses the chapter reviews¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 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 that when all items are first learned to criterion, repeated retrieval still shows sizable effects on long-term retention, which it attributes to changes in forgetting rate. → Karpicke 2017 q2 i? The chapter reports, citing Carpenter et al. (2008), that fitting forgetting to a power function showed initial retrieval practice altered the rate of forgetting. → Karpicke 2017 (2)

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 · r3

The chapter reviews learn-to-criterion experiments where each item is recalled once before manipulation; there "any effect of repeated retrieval must be attributed to changes to the forgetting rate", and these procedures show sizable effects.

"Under these conditions, any effect of repeated retrieval must be attributed to changes to the forgetting rate for repeatedly retrieved items. These procedures tend to show rather sizable effects of repeated retrieval on long-term retention"

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 · r2

The chapter reports, citing Carpenter et al. (2008), three experiments with final tests at intervals from 5 min to 42 days; they "determined that initial retrieval practice did indeed alter the rate at which items were forgotten".

"By using a quantitative approach to examine the mathematical form of forgetting, Carpenter et al. determined that initial retrieval practice did indeed alter the rate at which items were forgotten."

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

• Retention interval moderates the testing effect: effects are larger after a day or more than at shorter intervals, where individual studies vary from reliable to null or reversed — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it

• Retrieval practice produces reliable positive effects at short delays, although some forgetting must set in so that the final test is not at ceiling — related
• Spaced retrieval practice produces better final retention than massed retrieval even though spacing lowers initial retrieval success, and more absolute spacing enhances long-term retention — related
• In Mnemosyne flashcard log data, adding a delay term improves the recall-prediction performance of exponential forgetting curve memory models. — related
• In the perceptual-cue reanalysis, the only reliable forgetting and slip deviations were a small forgetting reduction under incongruent color and a modest slip reduction under congruent spacing — related
• The retrieval (TTST) advantage appeared at both short (5 min) and long (24 h) retention delays, with no reliable evidence that it differed between them — related
• In a perceptual-cue intervention reanalysis, incongruent spacing and incongruent color conditions were associated with reduced guessing relative to neutral conditions — related
• Time-based forgetting occurs across presentation methods, with rate determined by consolidation time — related
• In Experiment 3, individual learners showed greater forgetting over 24 hours than paired learners — related