Potts, R; (2014) Memory interference and the benefits and costs of testing. Doctoral thesis , UCL (University College London).

Preview

PDF Thesis final version.pdf Available under License : See the attached licence file. Download (657kB)

Abstract

Testing often enhances memory, but memory can be harmed by interference from similar or competing items. This thesis examines two situations in which it has been proposed that testing can be harmful to memory because the test itself increases susceptibility to interference. Experiments 1-8 investigate the effect of generating errors during new learning. Participants learned definitions for unfamiliar English words, or translations for foreign vocabulary, either by generating a response and being given corrective feedback, by reading the word and its definition, or by selecting from a choice of definitions followed by feedback. In a final test of all words, generating errors followed by feedback led to significantly better memory for the correct definition than either reading or making incorrect choices, suggesting that the benefits of generation are not restricted to correctly generated items. Even when information to be learned is novel, errorful generation may play a powerful role in potentiating encoding of corrective feedback. Metacognitive judgments of learning revealed that participants were strikingly unaware of this benefit, judging errorful generation to be a less effective encoding method than reading or incorrect choosing, when in fact it was better. Predictions reflected participants’ subjective experience during learning. A second series of experiments (Experiments 9-10) examines the claim that reactivating a consolidated memory destabilizes it, making it more susceptible to interference from new learning. Participants learned English-Swahili word pairs (List 1) on Day 1 with a final test on Day 3. When memory of List 1 was reactivated in the form of a reminder test immediately before learning Finnish words (List 2) on Day 2, testing, far from impairing List 1 memory, enhanced it, revealing a testing effect. Furthermore, List 2 learning disrupted List 1 memory when there was no reminder test, but reminder testing immunized the memory against interference.

Download activity - last month

Export as XMLJSONCSV

Download activity - last 12 months

Export as CSVJSONXML

Downloads by country - last 12 months

Export as XMLCSVJSON

Archive Staff Only

View Item