No abstract

College students rated the likelihood of recall of individual words presented for free recall learning. Predictions were made using a 7-point scale immediately following an item's presentation in the list, To-be-rated items included those presented one time, as well as items presented twice in either a massed (MP) or distributed (DP) manner. Twice-presented items were rated as more likely to be recalled than items presented once, and they were; MP items were judged more likely to be recalled than DP items, but they were not. The finding that subjects think that they know MP items when they do not suggests why processing may be less for massed than for distributed presentations. As such, these results provide support for the attenuation of attention hypothesis of the spacing effect in free recall.

1978) demonstrated that a pattern of expanding retrieval trials following a single study opportunity results in higher final recall than uniform spacing or uniform massing of tests. Although expanding retrieval practice has been described as a powerful mnemonic strategy with wide potential application, it has been infrequently investigated. The authors obtained evidence for the generality of this strategy by exploring systematically in a series of 5 experiments the conditions under which an expanding pattern of retrieval enhances retention. By expanding knowledge of this mnemonic strategy, the authors seek to stimulate research on what appears to be a missed opportunity for applied memory researchers.

Is there a core set of key concepts that defines a common language for introductory psychology? A content analysis of the glossaries of 10 major introductory psychology textbooks identified 2,505 different terms and concepts. Only 64 items (< 3%) were common to all glossaries; approximately half (49%) appeared in only 1 glossary. Ratings of item importance by a national sample of 191 instructors indicated moderate agreement between instructors and authors as to what constitutes a key concept. These results, and those of previous studies, pose a serious dilemma for those who wish to follow the prescription that "less is more" in content coverage in the introductory course. Just what should that "less" be?