Processing strategies and the generation effect: Implications for making a better reader

Abstract

When presented with items that must be generated versus read at encoding, individuals typically remember better those items that they generated versus those that they only read. We examined whether--given the opportunity to experience such differential memorial consequences of generating versus reading--participants might change how they processed future to-be-read information. In a first set of two experiments, participants were able to profit from such an experience to the extent that a generation advantage was eliminated on subsequent memory tests of generated and read items. Two additional experiments demonstrated the critical nature of this experience in leading to improved processing of future to-be-read information and elimination of a generation advantage. We believe that these results relate to the characterization of the learner emerging from recent metacognitive research and have possible implications for how learners might be induced to process information more effectively.

Principles of cognitive science in education: The effects of generation, errors, and feedback

“…The important pedagogical implication of the absence of a generation effect in our three replications of the present experiment, as well as in deWinstanley and Bjork's (2004) research, is that it might be easy for a savvy educator to produce a generation effect and thereby greatly enhance his or her students' learning. The read condition in our follow-up experiments, in which a large generation effect was manifested, was such that the learner could passively read (or maybe even not read) the materials.…”

A cognitive-science based programme to enhance study efficacy in a high and low risk setting

“…Metcalfe and Kornell (in press), and deWinstanley's group (deWinstanley & Bjork, 2004;deWinstanley, Bjork, & Bjork, 1996) have found that the generation effect is not always in evidence when performance on the generate items is compared to a control condition in which items were presented to the students. The reason for this apparent failure of a well-replicated laboratory finding may not be that the generation effect itself is not robust, however, but rather that it may be too robust.…”

Learning how to learn: Can experiencing the outcome of different encoding strategies enhance subsequent encoding?

“…If, as deWinstanley and Bjork (2004) speculated, the opportunity for participants to experience the generation advantage in their own memory performance leads them to develop more effective encoding strategies, then some of their responses might reflect this awareness. deWinstanley and Bjork (2004) coded any mention by participants of their thinking that they remembered words better when they had "to complete" them or had "to figure" them "out" as indicating an awareness of a recall advantage for generated items; accordingly, just over half of the participants revealed this awareness. Most of these participants then processed the to-be-read items in the second passage more effectively, as indicated by their improved recall of such items.…”

“…These findings raise many interesting questions-some regarding the underlying cause of the effect observed by deWinstanley and Bjork (2004), and some regarding how these findings might best be applied to educational practices. Certainly a critical question concerns the effect's durability.…”

“…Certainly a critical question concerns the effect's durability. In the experiments of deWinstanley and Bjork (2004), the second passage was always presented with little or no delay after the test of the first passage, raising the question of whether the testing experience leads to enhanced encoding of new information only when that information is presented immediately after the test. Perhaps, for example, a delay between the testing experience and the presentation of the next passage would prevent participants from adopting a more effective processing strategy for subsequent to-be-read information.…”