Distributed presentations are recalled better than massed presentations in free recall (the spacing effect), and requiring likelihood ratings does not alter this effect¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · 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? In free recall, twice-presented distributed items are recalled better than twice-presented massed items. → Zechmeister 1980 q3 i? Requiring recall-likelihood ratings during study does not alter the MP-DP recall difference (spacing × rating interaction not significant). → Zechmeister 1980

Evidence¶

Zechmeister 1980¶

Zechmeister, E. B., & Shaughnessy, J. J. (1980). When you know that you know and when you think that you know but you don't. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 15(1), 41-44. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03329756

q3 · i? · causal · r1

A free recall experiment with 24 Loyola University students; items presented once or twice (massed or distributed, lags of 3-5 items) at a 6-sec rate, with a 1-min math distractor and 4 min for recall. The article reports "A typical spacing effect was obtained", with the rating requirement not altering it (F < 1).

"A typical spacing effect was obtained for free recall of twice-presented items [F(l ,23) =5.9, MSe =.82, p < .05] . Further, the difference in recall between MP and DP items was similar for both rated and nonrated items , the interaction between conditions of spacing and rating not being significant (F < 1)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Learners accurately judge that twice-presented items are more likely to be recalled than once-presented items — related
• First-grade children show the typical spacing effect in free recall with the same picture procedures — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Learners judge massed-presented items as more likely to be recalled than distributed-presented items, although their recall is worse — related
• Items rated for recall likelihood are recalled at a higher overall level than nonrated items, though extra effective study time confounds this — related
• With incidental orienting tasks that focus processing on individual words and give no incentive to form associations, distributed presentations produce better free recall than massed presentations — related
• In Experiment 1, the type-of-recall by varied-constant by distribution interaction was significant, with a massed-distributed effect only in constant cued recall and a distribution effect in both free-recall conditions — related
• Across item types, items given high recall-likelihood ratings are recalled with greater probability than items given lower ratings — related
• Preschool children do not exhibit a spacing effect in free recall, although they benefit from repetition — reports the opposite
• Distributing drill repetitions in time gives better learning results than making many repetitions in succession — a narrower finding that bears on this claim