Effects of orienting task and spacing of repetitions on frequency judgments.

Rose, Robert J.; Rowe, Edward J.

doi:10.1037/0278-7393.2.2.142

Cited by 77 publications

(93 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The most straightforward explanation of our findings is a deficient-processing account similar to that proposed in the context of cuedmemory research (Challis, 1993;Rose & Rowe, 1976;Russo et al, 1998). When conceptually driven, explicit tests, such as free recall, are involved, performance is as-spacing effect.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 61%

“…Our results both support and place limits on the hypothesis that the spacing effect in free recall is the product of be minimized because it is highly primed by the first presentation (Challis, 1993), or because it is recognized as a repetition, and processing is terminated without the need for elaborate semantic processing (Rose, 1980;Rose & Rowe, 1976). Although these hypotheses have been formulated in the context of research on cued-memory tasks involving conceptually driven processes (e.g., frequency judgments of meaningful stimuli), there is no obvious reason why similar processes could not influence other conceptually driven retrieval tasks, such as free recall.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 57%

“…Some encouragement for the semantic-processing hypothesis comes from recognition and frequency-judgment experiments that obtained a spacing effect with adults following incidental semantic processing of words, but not following incidental graphemic processing (Challis, 1993;Rose & Rowe, 1976; see also . These findings have been interpreted as evidence for a deficient-processing account of the spacing effect, in which massed repetitions are remembered more poorly than spaced repetitions, because the former receive less semantic processing.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The spacing effect in intentional and incidental free recall by children and adults: Limits on the automaticity hypothesis

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 61%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 57%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The spacing effect in intentional and incidental free recall by children and adults: Limits on the automaticity hypothesis

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The ability to judge other details of a word's prior presentation begins about 100 msec later (Gronlund, Edwards, & Ohrt, 1997;Hintzman, 2000;Hintzman & Caulton, 1997;Hintzman & Curran, 1994). Sixth, encoding manipulations such as levels of processing (Fisk & Schneider, 1984;Naveh-Benjamin & Jonides, 1985;Rose & Rowe, 1976;Rowe, 1974), read versus generate (Greene, 1988), and spacing of repetitions (Hintzman, 1969;Hintzman & Block, 1970;Hintzman & Rogers, 1973;Underwood, 1969) have effects on JOF magnitude that parallel their effects on recognition accuracy. Seventh, materials manipulations that produce mirror effects in recognition memory (common vs. rare words, and nouns vs. consonant strings) also produce mirror effects in the discrimination of frequencies (Greene & Thapar, 1994).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Similarity, global matching, and judgments of frequency

Hintzman

2001

Memory & Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

retrieval cue does not isolate a specific memory trace, but rather activates many traces simultaneously, each to a degree depending on its similarity to the cue. The retrieved information is a scalar value (variously referred to as strength, familiarity, similarity, or echo intensity) that represents the sum of memory activation produced by the cue. Old-new recognition judgments are made relative to a criterion on the summed activation scale, and forced-choice recognition judgments are made by choosing the test alternative whose summed activation is the highest. Clark and Gronlund (1996) discuss some of the successes and failures of these models.One success of global-matching models has been in explaining the test-pair similarity effect-a phenomenon of forced-choice recognition. Consider two unrelated items, A and B, both of which are old with respect to the study list, and two new items, A¢ ( similar to A) and B¢ (similar to B). Two-alternative forced-choice performance is better on similar pairs such as A versus A¢ than it is on dissimilar pairs such as A versus B¢. In the first case, the lure is related to the old test item with which it is paired, and in the second case, it is related to an old item that is not part of the same test pair. The test-pair similarity effect has been found in experiments manipulating the orthographic similarity of words (Hall, 1979), the semantic similarity of words (Hintzman, 1988), and the visual similarity of photographs (Tulving, 1981). An exception is that the opposite effect-a similar-pair disadvantage-occurs in associative recognition (Clark, Hori, & Callan, 1993).The test-pair similarity prediction derives from a fundamental property of global matching models, which is that correlated inputs or cues produce correlated outputs. Because cues A and A¢ are similar, they tend to activate the same subset of memory traces, prominently including the trace of A itself. Thus, if A produces summed activation that is relatively high for an old test item, A¢ will tend to cause activation that is relatively high for a new item. If A produces activation that is low for an old item, A¢ is likely to produce activation that is low for a new item. No such correlation is predicted for the unrelated test pair, A versus B¢.The choice between an old test item and a new test item is made by selecting the item with the higher summed activation; thus the probability of an error is P[(X 2 Y ) < 0], where X is activation caused by the old item, and Y is activation caused by the new item. In the simplest model, the old-and new-item means ( μ X and μ Y ) and variances (s 2 X and s 2 Y ) are assumed to be unaffected by the type of test pairing. Thus, P[(X 2 Y ) < 0] increases as a direct function of the variance of the differences, X 2 Y:where r XY is the Pearson correlation relating X and Y. When the old item is A and the new item is B¢, r is zero and the error rate is at its maximum. When the old item is A and the new item is A¢, r is positive and the error rate is reduced. To see intuitively why thi...

show abstract

“…It could be argued that the habituation hypothesis is only concerned with processes related to deliberate encoding into memory and, hence, that these RT studies are irrelevant. However, with this restriction, the theory is now unable to account for the spacing effect found in incidental learning (McFarland, Rhodes, & Frey, 1979;Rose, 1980;Rose & Rowe, 1976). A different approach, presented by Jacoby (1978), emphasizes an analogy between memorizing a word and solving a problem.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Pupil dilations following pairs of identical and related to-be-remembered words

Magliero

1983

Memory & Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments are reported in which the spacing between pairs of identical (Experiment 1) or pairs of related (Experiment 2) to-be-remembered words were varied while pupil diameter and frequency judgments were measured. In Experiment I, frequency judgments increased with increases in spacing length. In Experiment 2, frequency judgments decreased with increases in spacing length. In both experiments, however, pupil dilations increased with increases in spacing length. These results are interpreted as supporting theories that argue that massed repetitions require less processing than spaced repetitions. It is argued that this deficiency in processing reduces retention of massed repetitions of identical words. For massed presentation of related words, organizational strategies can be used with little effort to increase retention.A common finding in memory research is that spaced repetitions of to-be-remembered words result in better retention than do massed repetitions. Many theories have been proposed to account for the spacing effect, but none has received a consensus of support. Several accounts of the spacing effect propose that massed repetitions receive less processing than do spaced repetitions. Underwood (1969) suggested that massed repetitions are not attended to as well as spaced repetitions. Shaughnessy, Zimmerman, and Underwood (1972) tested this voluntary-attention explanation of the spacing effect by allowing subjects to control the time spent studying each to-be-remembered item. They found that repeated items were given less study time when the repetitions were massed than when they were spaced. Damaging evidence against the voluntary-attention hypothesis, however, was produced by Hintzman, Summers, Eki, and Moore (1975). In Experiment I, they paired some of the repeated items with an incentive tone signaling high payoff for later retention. The incentive tone elevated frequency judgments at all spacings, but the spacing effect was the same in the notone and the tone conditions. In Experiment II, subjects studied some lists aloud by reciting each word three times. Again, this failed to attenuate the spacing effect This paper is based on a dissertation submitted to the U niversity of Texas at Arlington in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the PhD degree. I would like to express my gratitude to James R. Erickson, Ira H. Bernstein, Robert J. Gatchel, James N. Bowen, and Raymond 1. Jackson for support and guidance. Additional thanks are extended to Edward Shoben for reviewing an earlier version of the manuscript, to EllenGorthey, Beth Huggins, Cheryl Buckner, and ElizabethGaasfor assistance in data collection and scoring, and to Betty Bilotta for typing. Requests for reprints should be sent to the author at Applied Science Associates, Inc., P.O. Box 158, Valencia, Pennsylvania 16059.(compared with a silent study condition). The final experiment measured eye fixations to pictures and found no effect of spacing length. The three experiments, then, produced no support for a voluntary-attention ...

show abstract

Effects of orienting task and spacing of repetitions on frequency judgments.

Cited by 77 publications

References 17 publications

The spacing effect in intentional and incidental free recall by children and adults: Limits on the automaticity hypothesis

The spacing effect in intentional and incidental free recall by children and adults: Limits on the automaticity hypothesis

Similarity, global matching, and judgments of frequency

Pupil dilations following pairs of identical and related to-be-remembered words

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About