Toward a quantitative theory for performance differences between anticipation and study‐test procedures: The retention interval model

Abstract

Izawa, C.: Toward a quantitative theory for performance differences between anticipation and study-test procedures: The retention interval model. Scandinavian Journal of Psychofogy, 1981, 22, 79-91.In an effort to account quantitatively for performance differences between study-test and anticipation methods, a rudimentary theory, the retention interval model, is proposed. This model postulates three different theoretical functions for the three operationally distinguishable and qualitatively different events in the retention interval: intercycle rest, intervening-study-events and intervening-test-events intervals. The retention interval model satisfactorily accounted for 144 data points based on 35, 136 observations (164 subjects) by using only 30 estimated parameters in three experiments (48 points via 10 parameters per experiment), with massed as well as spaced practice, under both anticipation and study-test (RT) methods. In spite of a restrictive parameter estimation mode, close agreements were achieved between the model and data. The retention interval appears to generate powerful effects in determining the absolute performance levels for both anticipation and study-test learning procedures in the various intercycle intervals.

The retention interval model

“…The fact that successful predictions were possible from the model independent of whether parameters were estimated from the study-test method alone, the anticipation method only, or both methods may imply that the two methods may not differ fundamentally in terms of the acquisition processes, although they may differ in their retention processes as spelled out in the model (Izawa, 1981), in the present learning situation.…”

“…The eight values thus estimated from Condition 3 (study-test, spaced practice) alone via Kelley's computer program (least squares, cf. Izawa, 1981) were: e=.998, e'=.111, f=.245, f'=.069, g=.450, g'=.010, k= .580, and k'=.025. (Parameters with " -."…”

“…The retention interval model (Izawa, 1981) has 11 postulates, and for the purpose of testing it quantitatively, it suffices here to summarize the model's mathematical formulation. The model assumes that any stimulus element in the universe belongs, at any given time, to one of the following four mutually exclusive and exhaustive states:…”

“…Retention processes occurring during the acquisition phase were saliently put into the foreground by the retention interval model (Izawa, 1972(Izawa, , 1981 in investigating varied performance differences between anticipation and study-test (reinforcement-test, RT) methods commonly used in paired-associate learning (PAL) and verbal discrimination learning (VDL). Two cycles of the PAL anticipation method, with random presentation order for an n-item list, may be illustrated as: (1) ed by broken lines, while its study event is shown by solid lines.…”

Auditory information processing and its method of presentation

“…The two item-information presentation methods can be expressed as in Equations 1 and 2, respectively: (Intercycle Interval (Izawa, 1981a(Izawa, , 1981b(Izawa, , 1981c) both qualitatively and quantitatively. The rationale for the model is based on the fact that individual retention intervals of the n-items (e.g.…”