Slow and steady often ties the race: Effects of item-specific and relational processing on cumulative recall.

Burns, Daniel J.; Schoff, Kristen

doi:10.1037/0278-7393.24.4.1041

Cited by 24 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To help us better conceptualize the differences between the two learning methods, we defined them in terms of a framework of differential processes that occur inherently due to the different learning methods. Specifically, it was expected that relational processing would occur for both repeated study and repeated retrieval in the learning of a categorized word list (Burns & Hebert, 2005;Burns & Schoff, 1998;Rundus, 1971), but repeated study would lend itself to more item-specific processing of materials due to increased exposure time and the creation of distinctive memory traces. While this combination of processing was expected to yield superior immediate recall, the operation of some item-specific processing was also deemed likely to interfere with the processing of information relationally.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Past research has shown that cumulative recall curves are effective in revealing the separate and/or mixed influences of item-specific and relational processing inherent in a participant's recall (Burns & Hebert, 2005;Burns & Schoff, 1998). Specifically, item-specific processing is characterized by curves where recall of studied material is both slower initially and slower to reach asymptotic level of recall, thereby producing a slow, steady rate across the entire recall period.…”

Section: Cumulative Recall and Cumulative Organization Curvesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One, we compute the ARC in recall to assess the extent of conceptual organization as a function of learning method, and we predict a replication of past patterns, such that repeated retrieval will produce higher ARC scores. Two, we compute cumulative scores across the recall period, assessing increments in both recall and ARC scores to examine the relative contributions of item-specific and relational processing across the learning methods (Burns, 2006;Burns & Hebert, 2005;Burns & Schoff, 1998). Three, we analyze the number of items gained and lost across the 1-week delay to also assess differences in item-specific and relational processing (Burns & Hebert, 2005).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The origin of the interaction between learning method and delay in the testing effect: The roles of processing and conceptual retrieval organization

Congleton

Rajaram

2011

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research has demonstrated a relationship between retrieval organization and the efficacy of prior repeated retrieval on delayed tests. The present study asked why repeated study engenders higher recall at a short delay despite lower retrieval organization but produces a decline at a long delay, and why repeated retrieval engenders lower recall at a short delay despite higher retrieval organization but produces stable recall over time. This relationship was examined through the inclusion of two successive recall tests-one immediately after learning method and one a week later. Results replicated the interaction in recall between learning method and delay characterizing the testing effect and, critically, revealed the qualitative differences inherent in the retrieval organization of each method. Specifically, stable recall in repeated retrieval was accompanied by strong and sustained conceptual organization, whereas organization for repeated study was tenuous and weakened across tests. These differences quantitatively were assessed through the use of five targeted analyses: specifically, the examination of cumulative recall curves, the accumulation of organization across time (a curve akin to cumulative recall), item gains and losses across time, changes in the size of categories across time, and the fate of specific clusters of recalled items across time. These differences are discussed within the context of differential processes occurring during learning method.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cumulative Recall and Cumulative Organization Curvesmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The origin of the interaction between learning method and delay in the testing effect: The roles of processing and conceptual retrieval organization

Congleton

Rajaram

2011

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Asymptotic recall level and rate of approaching asymptote have consistently been found to be inversely related, such that higher levels of asymptotic recall produce a slower approach to asymptote (see, e.g., Bousfield & Sedgewick, 1944;Herrmann & Chaffin, 1976;Herrmann & Murray, 1979;Johnson, Johnson, & Mark, 1951;Kaplan, Carvellas, & Metlay, 1969). However, Burns and Schoff (1998) showed that this relationship is often violated when differing levels of item-specific and relational processing are performed. The curves typically produced following item-specific, relational, or both types of processing have been published in several places (Burns, 2006;Burns & Hebert, 2005;Burns et al, 2006;Burns & Schoff, 1998), so we will not reproduce them here.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

“…A decrease in item losses results from enhanced relational processing, apparently because the encoded relational information provides an organized search strategy that facilitates accessibility of the items (see Burns & Gold, 1999;Burns & Schoff, 1998;Hunt & McDaniel, 1993;McDaniel, Moore, & Whiteman, 1998). Presumably, the same relational cues are used across successive tests, resulting in a similar retrieval strategy that minimizes item losses.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Falsely recalled items are rich in item-specific information

2007

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current theorizing suggests that critical lures in the Deese/Roediger-McDermott (DRM) procedure are often falsely remembered because they have received considerable relational processing (e.g., spreading activation or encoding of gist information). We used a repeated-testing paradigm to assess the amount of item-specific and relational processing given to the list items and the critical lures. Research has shown that items receiving itemspecific processing are more likely to be recovered across successive tests. They are also output more slowly but more steadily throughout the recall period. In two experiments, we manipulated the processing performed on list items and then used item gains and cumulative recall curves to assess the amount of item-specific and relational information encoded for both list items and lures. The results suggest that increasing the relational processing of list items increased item-specific processing of lures, whereas increasing item-specific processing of list items decreased item-specific processing of lures. We conclude that critical lures are typically rich in item-specific information, relative to list items.

show abstract

Memory for actions: Item and relational information in categorized lists

Engelkamp

Seiler

Zimmer

2003

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Enacting action phrases in subject-performed tasks (SPTs) leads to better free recall than hearing or reading the same materials in verbal tasks (VTs). This enactment effect is usually explained by better item-specific information in SPTs than in VTs. The role of relational information is controversial. In the present paper, we will take the multiple recall approach to study the role of item and relational information in memory for actions by computing the number of item gains and the number of item losses over trials. This approach has previously been applied to lists of unrelated action phrases. We applied it to categorically related lists, also allowing a measure of relational information by clustering scores. It was found that SPTs produced more item gains than VTs. This finding confirmed the assumption that SPTs provide better item-specific information than VTs. The number of item losses did not differ between VTs and SPTs. This finding suggests that relational information is equally provided by VTs and SPTs. However, the organizational scores showed a more differentiated picture. Clustering was greater in SPTs than in VTs with randomly presented lists, but not with blocked lists. We suggested that these results, as well as other findings from the literature, could be explained by distinguishing automatic and strategic processes and the types of item associations that are addressed by these processes.

show abstract

Slow and steady often ties the race: Effects of item-specific and relational processing on cumulative recall.

Cited by 24 publications

References 40 publications

The origin of the interaction between learning method and delay in the testing effect: The roles of processing and conceptual retrieval organization

The origin of the interaction between learning method and delay in the testing effect: The roles of processing and conceptual retrieval organization

Falsely recalled items are rich in item-specific information

Memory for actions: Item and relational information in categorized lists

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About