Your search found 74139 results.

Descriptors:
Memory; Attention; Transfer of Training; Learning Strategies; Task Analysis; Recall (Psychology); Role; Cues; Young Children; Fatigue (Biology); Metacognition

Abstract:
Three studies examined whether strategy utilization deficiencies emerge during transfer to two tasks that differ superficially from the main task but have the same underlying structural logic. In Experiment 1, children aged 4, 4 1/2, and 5 spontaneously produced selective attention strategies (or were prompted to do so) on a selective memory task. Although children of all ages transferred this strategy, recall declined on the transfer tasks, a pattern indicating a "transfer utilization deficiency." This pattern appeared whether children were initially strategic or became strategic after prompts. Individual and trial-by-trial analyses showed asynchronies between changes in strategic behavior and recall (e.g., increased strategy production but decreased recall), which indicate a utilization deficiency. Experiment 2 demonstrated this pattern in spontaneously strategic 4-year-olds, and, by systematically varying task order, eliminated the possibility that transfer tasks were simply more difficult. Experiment 3 eliminated the role of boredom or fatigue for spontaneously strategic 4- and 5-year-olds. Transfer tasks may generate uncertainty about whether and how to apply a strategy, leading to resource-demanding self-monitoring and thus utilization deficiencies. (Contains 4 figures.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Verbal Learning; Memorization; Reading Difficulties; Adolescents; Intelligence Tests; Control Groups; Phonetics; Semantics; Memory; Semiotics; Recall (Psychology); Cues; Retention (Psychology); Word Lists; Statistical Analysis; Learning Disabilities; Articulation Impairments; Effect Size

Abstract:
The authors of this current study compared the memory performance of adolescent students with specific reading disabilities (RD) with that of typical adolescent readers on a newly developed verbal learning test, the "Bergen-Tucson Verbal Learning Test" (BTVLT). This multiple trial test was designed to measure memory acquisition, retention, retrieval, and forgetting rates, as well as the ability to organize and retrieve the information from memory according to the phonological (surface) and semantic (lexical) features of words. A total of 20 participants with RD and 20 control participants (mean age = 15.2 years) were matched for age, gender, and ethnicity. Results indicated that the RD group learned significantly fewer list items and did so at a slower rate than the control group. Although the participants with RD were equally able to retain information once learned, they did demonstrate inefficient elaborative rehearsal strategies. They also recalled fewer words in both the semantic and phonetic cued-recall conditions, but the effect size was significantly greater in the latter. Taken together, the data suggest that students with RD have less efficient rehearsal and encoding mechanisms but typical retention. Retrieval also appears typical except under conditions that require information to be recalled based on phonetic codes. (Contains 6 tables and 2 figures.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Memory; Memorization; Experiments; Responses; Retention (Psychology); Comparative Analysis; Adults; Tests; Response Style (Tests); Cues; Recall (Psychology)

Abstract:
Retrieval demand, as implemented through test format and retrieval instructions, was varied across two misinformation experiments. Our goal was to examine whether increasing retrieval demand would improve the relationship between confidence and memory performance, and thereby reduce misinformation susceptibility. We hypothesized that improving the relationship between confidence and memory performance would improve controlled processes at retrieval. That is, when confidence and memory performance were well calibrated, participants would be able to withhold incorrect responses if given the opportunity. To examine the relationship between memory retention, confidence, and controlled withholding, we compared older and younger adults' performance on a forced memory test, where participants could not withhold responses, and on a free test, where participants were encouraged to withhold responses. Confidence judgments were collected after forced responding. Retrieval demand was manipulated indirectly through type of test (cued recall vs. recognition) and directly through retrieval instructions. The results demonstrated that increasing retrieval demands improved memory retention, metamemorial monitoring and effective withholding. This was particularly pronounced when participants received misleading information. Finally, older adults required explicit direction to effectively monitor memory and institute successful controlled withholding. (Contains 3 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Verbal Stimuli; Recall (Psychology); Mnemonics; Experiments; Retention (Psychology); Coding; Memory

Abstract:
Does retrieval practice produce learning because it is an especially effective way to induce elaborative encoding? Four experiments examined this question. Subjects learned word pairs across alternating study and recall periods, and once an item was recalled it was dropped from further practice, repeatedly studied, or repeatedly retrieved on repeated recall trials. In elaborative study conditions, subjects used an imagery-based keyword method (Experiments 1-2) or a verbal elaboration method (Experiment 3) to encode items during repeated study trials. On a criterial test 1 week after the initial learning phase, repeated retrieval produced better long-term retention than repeated study even under elaborative study conditions. Elaborative studying improved initial encoding when it occurred prior to the first correct recall of an item, but while repeated retrieval enhanced long-term retention, elaboration produced no measurable learning when it occurred after successful retrieval. Experiment 4 used identical item word pairs (e.g., "castle-castle") to reduce or eliminate verbal elaboration, and robust effects of repeated retrieval were still observed with these materials. Retrieval practice likely produces learning by virtue of mechanisms other than elaboration. (Contains 1 table, 8 figures, and 2 experiments.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Memory; Metacognition; Study; Self Control; Decision Making; Accuracy; Prediction; Recall (Psychology); Evaluative Thinking; Correlation; Undergraduate Students

Abstract:
A widely held assumption in metamemory is that better, more accurate metamemory monitoring leads to better, more efficacious restudy decisions, reflected in better memory performance--we refer to this causal chain as the "restudy selectivity hypothesis". In 3 sets of experiments, we tested this hypothesis by factorially manipulating metamemory monitoring accuracy and self-regulation of study. To manipulate monitoring accuracy, we compared judgments of learning (JOLs) made contemporaneously with a delayed retrieval attempt to JOLs either made at a delay without attempting retrieval or made immediately after study; in previous studies, delayed retrieval-based JOLs have robustly predicted recall with greater relative accuracy than have the other JOL types. To manipulate self-regulation of study, in Experiments 1A-1C and 2A-2C, we compared conditions in which participants' restudy selections were honored with conditions in which they were completely or randomly dishonored; in Experiments 3A-3C, we randomly honored or dishonored half of the restudy selections and half of the nonselections. Results revealed that the benefit of delayed, retrieval-based JOLs for final memory performance was due largely to the selection of more items for restudy rather than to better discriminations between items that would benefit more versus less from restudy. In most cases, gains in recall due to greater self-regulation of study did not increase with better monitoring accuracy; when they did, the effect was extremely small. The surprising conclusion was that restudy decisions were not very much more efficacious under conditions that yield greater monitoring accuracy than under those that do not. (Contains 11 tables, 5 figures and 9 footnotes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Memory; Testing; Intervention; Learning Strategies; Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder; Metacognition; Memorization; Adults; Correlation; Control Groups; Prediction; Paired Associate Learning; Recall (Psychology); Clinical Diagnosis; Identification; Measures (Individuals)

Abstract:
ADHD in adulthood is associated with chronic academic impairments and problems with strategic memory encoding on standardized memory assessments, but little is known about self-regulated learning that might guide intervention. Objective: Examine the contribution of metamemory judgment accuracy and use of learning strategies to self-regulated learning in adults with ADHD, focusing on the use of self-testing. Method: A total of 34 adults with ADHD and 34 matched controls predicted their memory performance and regulated their learning of paired associates. Results: Adults with ADHD were as accurate as controls at predicting memory performance, despite remembering fewer words. By observation and self-report, they were less likely to use self-testing to learn the pairs. Conclusion: Across groups, self-testing was associated with significantly better recall and largely accounted for differences between diagnostic groups. Adults with ADHD often failed to employ a strategy that was associated with improved memory, identifying an intervention target that may improve self-regulated learning. (Contains 2 tables, 1 figure, and 4 notes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Memory; Feedback (Response); Cues; Metacognition; Direct Instruction; Memorization; Role; Drills (Practice); Recall (Psychology); Teaching Methods

Abstract:
Although memory performance benefits from the spacing of information at encoding, judgments of learning (JOLs) are often not sensitive to the benefits of spacing. The present research examines how practice, feedback, and instruction influence JOLs for spaced and massed items. In Experiment 1, in which JOLs were made after the presentation of each item and participants were given multiple study-test cycles, JOLs were strongly influenced by the repetition of the items, but there was little difference in JOLs for massed versus spaced items. A similar effect was shown in Experiments 2 and 3, in which participants scored their own recall performance and were given feedback, although participants did learn to assign higher JOLs to spaced items with task experience. In Experiment 4, after participants were given direct instruction about the benefits of spacing, they showed a greater difference for JOLs of spaced vs massed items, but their JOLs still underestimated their recall for spaced items. Although spacing effects are very robust and have important implications for memory and education, people often underestimate the benefits of spaced repetition when learning, possibly due to the reliance on processing fluency during study and attending to repetition, and not taking into account the beneficial aspects of study schedule. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Definitions; Memory; Underachievement; Metacognition; Correlation; Learning Processes; College Students; Recall (Psychology); Tests; Cues; Individual Differences; Intervention; Self Evaluation (Individuals); Learning Theories

Abstract:
The function of accurately monitoring one's own learning is to support effective control of study that enhances learning. Although this link between monitoring accuracy and learning is intuitively plausible and is assumed by general theories of self-regulated learning, it has not received a great deal of empirical scrutiny and no study to date has examined the link between monitoring accuracy and longer-term retention. Across two studies, college students paced their study of key-term definitions (e.g., "Proactive interference: Information already stored in memory interferes with the learning of new information"). After all definitions were studied, participants completed practice cued recall tests (e.g., "What is proactive interference?") in which they attempted to type the correct definition for each term. After each test trial, participants judged how much of their response was correct. These study-test-judgment trials continued until a definition was judged as correct three times. A final cued recall test occurred two days later. In Study 1, judgment accuracy was manipulated experimentally, and in Study 2, individual differences in accuracy were examined. In both studies, greater accuracy was associated with higher levels of retention, and this link could not be explained by differential feedback, effort during study, or trials to criterion. Results indicate that many students could benefit from interventions aimed at improving their skill at judging their learning. (Contains 3 figures.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Evidence; Cues; Alzheimers Disease; Diseases; Metacognition; Memory; Cognitive Processes; Visual Stimuli; Recall (Psychology); Comparative Analysis; Individual Differences; Problem Solving; Task Analysis; Neuropsychology; Accuracy

Abstract:
Alzheimer's disease (AD) can impair metacognition in addition to more basic cognitive functions like memory. However, while global metacognitive inaccuracies are well documented (i.e., low deficit awareness, or anosognosia), the evidence is mixed regarding the effects of AD on local or task-based metacognitive judgments. Here we investigated local metacognition with respect to the confidence-accuracy relationship in episodic memory (i.e., metamemory). AD and control participants studied pictures of common objects and their verbal labels, and then took forced-choice picture recollection tests using the verbal labels as retrieval cues. We found that item-based confidence judgments discriminated between accurate and inaccurate recollection responses in both groups, implicating relatively spared metamemory in AD. By contrast, there was evidence for global metacognitive deficiencies, as AD participants underestimated the severity of their everyday problems compared to an informant's assessment. Within the AD group, individual differences in global metacognition were related to recollection accuracy, and global metacognition for everyday memory problems was related to task-based metacognitive accuracy. These findings suggest that AD can spare the confidence-accuracy relationship in recollection tasks, and that global and local metacognition measures tap overlapping neuropsychological processes. (Contains 3 figures and 3 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Animals; Reinforcement; Accuracy; Memory; Conditioning; Stimuli; Food; Color; Light; Reaction Time; Retention (Psychology); Intervals; Selection

Abstract:
Pigeons performed a delayed matching-to-sample task in which large or small reinforcers for correct remembering were signaled during the retention interval. Accuracy was low when small reinforcers were signaled, and high when large reinforcers were signaled (the signaled magnitude effect). When the reinforcer-size cue was switched from small to large partway through the retention interval, accuracy accordingly changed from low to high. The opposite happened when the cue was switched from large to small. This dissociation of forgetting from the passage of time raises the possibility that remembering is delay-specific. The reversal of the signaled magnitude effect during the retention interval is consistent with an attentional account in which the stimulus control of remembering is influenced by extraneous events. (Contains 4 figures.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website