The dual-process perspective and the benefits of retrieval practice in younger and older adults

Shaffer, Ruth A.; McDermott, Kathleen B.

doi:10.1080/09658211.2022.2027986

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 77 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, a positive testing effect emerged when feedback was provided. This pattern is consistent across several studies, indicating that the testing effect diminishes in older adults without feedback post-retrieval, yet with feedback, older adults exhibit a comparable testing effect to that of younger adults (Coane, 2013;Guran et al, 2019Guran et al, , 2020Shaffer & McDermott, 2022). Considering the well-documented decline in working memory capacity among the elderly (for reviews, see Hasher & Zacks, 1988;Jaroslawska & Rhodes, 2019;Sander et al, 2012), it is reasonable to hypothesize that working memory capacity contributes to the observed interplay between age, feedback, and the testing effect.…”

Section: Behavioral Evidence Supporting the Modelsupporting

confidence: 83%

Beyond One-Size-Fits-All: A Working Memory Dependent Dual-Process Model of the Testing Effect

Zheng,

Shi,

Liu

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Existing literature illustrates that the benefits of testing in learning may not be universal. However, individual differences are largely neglected in theoretical explanations of the testing effect. The lack of individualized predictions concerning the testing effect presents a substantial challenge for educators. Here, we propose a novel working memory-dependent dual-process model to elucidate individual differences in the testing effect. This model posits that the testing effect comprises two interlinked processes: a retrieval-attempt process and a post-retrieval re-encoding process. Both processes consume working memory (WM) resources. Thus, the effectiveness of testing as a learning tool is contingent upon an individual's available WM resources and the WM demands of the task. We substantiate our model with behavioral and neuroimaging evidence. This model invites further research to analyze the potential trade-off between testing benefits and WM demands, facilitating the development of personalized educational practices.

show abstract

Section: Behavioral Evidence Supporting the Modelsupporting

confidence: 83%

Beyond One-Size-Fits-All: A Working Memory Dependent Dual-Process Model of the Testing Effect

Zheng,

Shi,

Liu

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…But beyond that, it is well established that shorter response deadlines can have a profound impact on retrieval, particularly with effortful processes like recollection (Gardiner et al, 1999; Yonelinas, 2002). Given the putative role that recollection plays in the testing effect (Chan & McDermott, 2007; Shaffer & McDermott, 2022), it is reasonable to assume that our response deadline manipulation would have an impact on the testing effect even if we allow for the idea that actual retrieval may be underestimated by the responses collected within the shorter deadlines.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The magnitude of the testing effect is independent of retrieval practice performance.

Chan,

Davis,

Yurtsever

et al. 2024

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Practicing retrieval is a potent learning enhancer. Theoretical accounts of the testing effect generally suggest that the magnitude of the testing effect is dependent on retrieval practice performance, such that conditions that promote better retrieval practice performance should result in a greater testing effect. Empirical evidence, however, has been mixed. Although some studies showed a positive association between retrieval practice performance and the testing effect, others have shown either no relation or the reverse. In the present study, we experimentally manipulated retrieval practice performance using a retrieval-based response deadline manipulation and an encoding-based study trial manipulation. Across six experiments, the magnitude of the testing effect was independent of retrieval practice performance. However, when we aggregated the data across the experiments, participants with superior retrieval practice performance showed a greater testing effect-an individual difference. This dissociation between experimental and correlational outcomes suggests that the positive relation between retrieval practice performance and the testing effect is not causal, and indeed, simulation data showed that the correlation between retrieval practice performance and testing effect was an artifact. We discuss the challenges these findings present to existing accounts of the testing effect. Public Significance StatementPracticing retrieval from memory can enhance learning and retention-the testing effect. However, research has produced mixed evidence about whether the benefits of retrieval depend on practice performance, with some suggesting that conditions that elicit better practice performance produce a greater testing effect, whereas others demonstrating either no effect or the opposite. In the present experiments, we showed that conditions that favored better retrieval practice performance did not produce a greater testing effect. These results challenge existing theories, and they demonstrate that students can reap similar benefits from retrieval practice regardless of whether or not learning conditions are optimized for successful retrieval practice.

show abstract

The dual-process perspective and the benefits of retrieval practice in younger and older adults

Cited by 2 publications

References 77 publications

Beyond One-Size-Fits-All: A Working Memory Dependent Dual-Process Model of the Testing Effect

Beyond One-Size-Fits-All: A Working Memory Dependent Dual-Process Model of the Testing Effect

The magnitude of the testing effect is independent of retrieval practice performance.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About