The forward effect of testing: Behavioral evidence for the reset-of-encoding hypothesis using serial position analysis

Abstract

The forward effect of testing refers to the finding that retrieval practice of previously studied information increases retention of subsequently studied other information. It has recently been hypothesized that the forward effect (partly) reflects the result of a reset-of-encoding (ROE) process. The proposal is that encoding efficacy decreases with an increase in study material, but testing of previously studied information resets the encoding process and makes the encoding of the subsequently studied information as effective as the encoding of the previously studied information. The goal of the present study was to verify the ROE hypothesis on an item level basis. An experiment is reported that examined the effects of testing in comparison to restudy on items’ serial position curves. Participants studied three lists of items in each condition. In the testing condition, participants were tested immediately on non-target lists 1 and 2, whereas in the restudy condition, they restudied list 1 and 2. In both conditions, participants were tested immediately on target list 3. Influences of condition and items’ serial learning position on list 3 recall were analyzed. The results showed the forward effect of testing and furthermore that this effect varies with items’ serial list position. Early target list items at list primacy positions showed a larger enhancement effect than middle and late target list items at non-primacy positions. The results are consistent with the ROE hypothesis on an item level basis. The generalizability of the ROE hypothesis across different experimental tasks, like the list-method directed-forgetting task, is discussed.

Does retrieval potentiate new learning when retrieval stops but new learning continues?

“…Retrieval can potentiate new learning by increasing learners' attention to subsequent material (Pastötter et al, 2018;Pastötter et al, 2011;Szpunar, 2017) and improving their encoding/retrieval strategies (Chan et al, 2018b;Soderstrom & Bjork, 2014). In the present study, we used participants' reported test expectancy ratings and semantic clustering scores to provide a quantitative estimate of attention-based and strategy-based processes, respectively.…”

“…The association between continuous episodic encoding and inattention is further illustrated through electrophysiological evidence, where alpha-band oscillations, an EEG indicator of inattention (Palva & Palva, 2007;Klimesch, 2012), rise with encoding, but this increase is abolished with interpolated retrieval practice (Pastötter, Schicker, Niedernhuber, & Bauml, 2011). This encoding-induced inattention can manifest through increasingly frequent bouts of mind wandering (Szpunar et al, 2013) and reduced capacity to learn new information (Pastötter, Engel, & Frings, 2018;Pastötter et al, 2011). When students are asked to retrieve previously studied material, however, the change in the task demand may halt further inattention by forcing learners to orient their attention back toward the target material (Davis & Chan, 2015;Davis, Chan, & Wilford, 2017;Pastötter et al, 2018).…”

“…This encoding-induced inattention can manifest through increasingly frequent bouts of mind wandering (Szpunar et al, 2013) and reduced capacity to learn new information (Pastötter, Engel, & Frings, 2018;Pastötter et al, 2011). When students are asked to retrieve previously studied material, however, the change in the task demand may halt further inattention by forcing learners to orient their attention back toward the target material (Davis & Chan, 2015;Davis, Chan, & Wilford, 2017;Pastötter et al, 2018). This refocusing is hypothesized to facilitate new learning following the retrieval opportunity.…”

Testing enhances subsequent learning in older adults.

“…The forward effect is typically attributed to PI reduction. The idea is that recall testing between the study of lists promotes contextual list segregation, which may enhance temporal differentiation between preceding and critical lists at test (Bäuml & Kliegl, 2013;Divis & Benjamin, 2014;Szpunar et al, 2008) and may also increase attentional resources during critical list encoding (Pastötter et al, 2011;Pastötter, Engel, & Frings, 2018). The forward effect is a robust phenomenon that has been replicated in a number of studies employing different item materials and different experimental settings (for reviews, see Pastötter & Bäuml, 2014;Yang, Potts, & Shanks, 2018).…”

“…4. A study byPastötter et al (2018) recently examined the forward effect of testing on immediate list 3 recall in 240 younger university students when employing an experimental setup that was similar to the present one. Effect size calculation of Cohen's for nonrepeated measures revealed a medium effect size for the forward effect, regarding both correct recall, = .614, and number of prior-list intrusions, = .396.…”