Spaced retrieval practice: can restudying trump retrieval?

Abstract

We investigated spaced retrieval and restudying in 3 preregistered, online experiments. In all experiments, participants studied 40 Swahili–English word pair translations during an initial study phase, restudied intact pairs or attempted to retrieve the English words to Swahili cues twice in three spaced practice sessions, and then completed a final cuedrecall test. All 5 sessions were separated by 2 days. In Experiment 1, we manipulated the response format during retrieval (covert vs. overt) and the test list structure (blocked vs. intermixed covert/overt retrieval trials). A memory rating was required on all trials (retrieval: “Was your answer correct?”; restudy: “Would you have remembered the correct translation?”). Response format had no effect on recall, but surprisingly, final test performance for restudied items exceeded both the overt and covert retrieval conditions. In Experiment 2, we manipulated the requirement to make a memory rating. If a memory rating was required, final test restudy performance exceeded retrieval performance, replicating Experiment 1. However, the pattern was descriptively reversed if no rating was required. In Experiment 3, the memory rating was removed altogether, and we examined recall performance for items restudied versus retrieved once, twice, or thrice. Performance improved with practice, and retrieval performance exceeded restudy performance in all conditions. The reversal of the typical retrieval practice effect observed in Experiments 1 and 2 is discussed in terms of theories of reactivity of memory judgments.

More information

Identifiers

ORCID for Philip A. Higham: orcid.org/0000-0001-6087-7224

ORCID for Greta M. Fastrich: orcid.org/0000-0001-7105-9091

Catalogue record

Export record

Altmetrics