Where and how to learn: The interactive benefits of contextual variation, restudying, and retrieval practice for learning

Abstract

Students are often advised to do all of their studying in one good place, but restudying to-be-learned material in a new context can enhance subsequent recall (e.g., Smith et al., 1978). We examined whether there are similar benefits for testing. In Experiment 1 (n = 106), participants studied a 36-word list and 48 hours later—when back in the same or a new context—either restudied or recalled the list without feedback. After another 48 hours, all participants free-recalled the list in a new context. Experiment 2 (n = 203) differed by having the testing-condition participants restudy the list before being tested. Across both experiments, testing in a new context reduced recall, which carried over to the final test, whereas restudying in a new context did not impair (and in Experiment 2, significantly enhanced) recall. These findings reveal critical interactions between contextual-variation and retrieval-practice effects, which we interpret as consistent with a distribution-of-memory-strengths framework.

Memory out of context: Spacing effects and decontextualization in a computational model of the medial temporal lobe

“…A final test was given for all pairs with no background context. As in S. M. Smith et al (1978) and Imundo et al (2021), cued recall for pairs in the variable (relative to the constant) condition was worse during learning but better at the final test, suggesting trial-specific pictorial context variability also decontextualized memories. Following the logic outlined in the preceding sections, these findings could arise because variable contexts offered less cue support to memories during learning, and this therefore led to more direct strengthening of the cue-target elements that were in common across training epochs.…”

“…In our initial simulations, this invariance arose to changing temporal contexts. Following findings from others that decontextualization can also arise due to invariance of learning environment (Imundo et al, 2021;S. M. Smith et al, 1978;S.…”

“…Nevertheless, it is difficult to overstate the importance of spacing in long-term learning (Bahrick, 1979;Rawson & Dunlosky, 2011): even the well-known importance of testing for learning [e.g., Rowland (2014)] cannot overcome poor temporal generalization when tests are conducted at short lags, as practicing paired associates up to 10 times with one-minute lags can still produce floor (< 5% correct) performance a week later (Pyc & Rawson, 2009). Ultimately, a memory that remains context-dependent [e.g., Abernethy (1940); Imundo et al (2021);Parker, Dagnall, and Coyle (2007); S. M. Smith et al (1978); S. M. Smith and Rothkopf (1984)] may not be ideal for learning because it continues to rely on the "crutch" of context -either the presence of contextual inputs or the mental recovery of a context -for successful memory retrieval (S. M. Smith & Handy, 2014). Efforts to render memories context-independent when the context is an incidental or irrelevant aspect of the memory will ultimately benefit lifelong learning.…”

User-generated digital flashcards yield better learning than premade flashcards.

“…It is important to emphasize that digital flashcards are commonly used in many ways—including different platforms, learning environments, and materials—and not under the same controlled circumstances as in the present experiments (cf. Cihon et al, 2012; Golding et al, 2012; Imundo et al, 2021; Reeser & Moon, 2018). Guidance for flashcard use is rare and the match between flashcard and exam content varies (e.g., strong alignment for instructor-provided flashcards and weak alignment for premade flashcards made by students lacking foreknowledge of the content to be tested).…”

Pan, Zung, Imundo, et al. (2022) User-generated versus pre-made digital flashcards

“…It is important to emphasize that digital flashcards are commonly used in many ways-including with different platforms, learning environments, and materials-and not under the same controlled circumstances as in the present experiments (cf. Cihon et al, 2012;Golding et al, 2012;Imundo et al, 2021;Reeser & Moon, 2017). Guidance for flashcard use is rare and the match between flashcard and exam content varies (e.g., strong alignment for instructor-provided flashcards and weak alignment for pre-made flashcards made by students lacking foreknowledge of the content to be tested).…”