scholarly journals Expecting to teach a novel golf putting task did not enhance retention performance: A replication attempt of Daou and colleagues

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brad McKay ◽  
Julia Hussien ◽  
Michael Carter ◽  
Zachary Yantha ◽  
Diane Ste-Marie
Keyword(s):  
Free Recall ◽  
Motor Learning ◽  
Recall Test ◽  
Free Recall Test ◽  
Thought Processes ◽  
Retention Performance ◽  
Golf Putting ◽  
Radial Error ◽  
Intrinsic Motivation Inventory ◽  
Golf Putt

While research has identified several practice variables that purportedly enhance motor learning, recent replication failures highlight the importance of conducting high-powered, pre-registered replications. The "expecting to teach" phenomenon was first reported in the motor learning literature by Daou and colleagues and suggested learners benefit from practicing with the understanding they will later need to teach the skill. The extant data have been mixed but generally positive. While expecting to teach has been shown to enhance motor learning of a golf putt, the mechanisms linked with this benefit are yet to be determined. As such, this study sought to replicate the expecting to teach effect and to extend those findings by exploring participants’ thought processes. Participants (N = 76) were randomly assigned to one of two groups in which they were told that they were learning a golf putt in order to 1) be tested on the skill or 2) teach the skill to another individual. On Day 1, participants completed pre-test putts, a pre-acquisition intrinsic motivation inventory (IMI), a 2-minute study of an instructional booklet, 50 practice putts and a post-acquisition IMI. During practice, participants were also afforded opportunities to continue studying the booklet and to complete additional putts. Participants returned 24 hours later to complete a retention, a transfer (50-cm longer golf-putt), and a free recall test, as well as a post-study survey to reveal thoughts they engaged in after practice but before (or during) the retention test. Similar to Daou et al., no significant differences were found with study time, number of acquisition putts, or motivation. However, golf-putting performance during retention resulted in no differences for radial error, g = -0.13 (95% C.I. [-0.55, 0.29]), between the two groups and no differences were shown for the recall test. The present study fails to replicate the benefits reported in the original experiments.

scholarly journals Expecting to teach a novel golf putting task did not enhance retention performance: A replication attempt of Daou and colleagues (2016;2016)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brad McKay ◽  
Julia Hussien ◽  
Michael J Carter ◽  
Zachary Dillon Yantha ◽  
Diane M. Ste-Marie
Keyword(s):  
Motor Learning ◽  
Recall Test ◽  
Free Recall Test ◽  
Thought Processes ◽  
Retention Performance ◽  
Golf Putting ◽  
Radial Error ◽  
G 13 ◽  
Intrinsic Motivation Inventory ◽  
Golf Putt

While research has identified several practice variables that purportedly enhance motor learning, recent replication failures highlight the importance of conducting high-powered, pre-registered replications. The “expecting to teach” phenomenon was first reported in the motor learning literature by Daou and colleagues and suggested learners benefit from practicing with the understanding they will later need to teach the skill. The extant data have been mixed but generally positive. While expecting to teach has been shown to enhance motor learning of a golf putt, the mechanisms linked with this benefit are yet to be determined. As such, this study sought to replicate the expecting to teach effect and to extend those findings by exploring participants’ thought processes. Participants (N = 76) were randomly assigned to one of two groups in which they were told that they were learning a golf putt in order to 1) be tested on the skill or 2) to teach the skill to another individual. On Day 1, participants completed pre-test putts, a pre-acquisition intrinsic motivation inventory (IMI), a 2-minute study of an instructional booklet, 50 practice putts and a post-acquisition IMI. During practice, participants were also afforded opportunities to continue studying the booklet and to complete additional putts. Participants returned 24-hours later to complete a retention, a transfer (50 cm longer golf-putt), and a free recall test, as well as a post-study survey to reveal thoughts they engaged in after practice but before (or during) the retention test. Similar to Daou et al., no significant differences were found with study time, number of acquisition putts, or motivation. However, golf-putting performance during retention resulted in no differences for radial error, g = −.13 (95%CI [−.55, .29]), between the two groups and no differences were shown for the recall test. The present study fails to replicate the benefits reported in the original experiments.

Specifying Levels of Processing

1979 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan J. Parkin
Keyword(s):  
Free Recall ◽  
Recall Test ◽  
The Other ◽  
Free Recall Test ◽  
Levels Of Processing ◽  
Retention Performance ◽  
Primary Associate ◽  
Semantic Condition ◽  
Processing Depth ◽  
Naming Latencies

This study examines the nature of stimulus processing under semantic and nonsemantic orienting instructions. Two experiments are reported in which subjects were presented with a series of trials each beginning with the presentation of a “decision word” about which they made either a semantic or non-semantic orienting decision. This decision was followed by a word in coloured ink whose colour subjects were required to name as quickly as possible. On half the trails the coloured word was the primary associate of the decision word whilst on the other half the two words were normatively unrelated. On completion of the experiments the subjects were given an unexpected free recall test. The semantic orienting condition led to longer colour naming latencies on associate trials whilst no such difference was found in the non-semantic condition. The semantic condition also produced higher levels of incidental recall although paradoxically an analysis of associative clustering in recall failed to show any difference between the two orienting conditions. The results are interpreted as support for the “Levels of Processing” approach to memory since they provide an index of processing depth which is independent of retention performance.

EXPRESS: On the Pervasive Effect of Word Frequency in Metamemory

2021 ◽  
pp. 174702182110533
Author(s):  
Pedro Simão Mendes ◽  
Monika Undorf
Keyword(s):  
Free Recall ◽  
Word Frequency ◽  
Recall Test ◽  
Memory Performance ◽  
Judgments Of Learning ◽  
Free Recall Test ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Font Size ◽  
Performance Judgments

Predictions of one’s future memory performance – judgments of learning (JOLs) – are based on the cues that learners regard as diagnostic of memory performance. One of these cues is word frequency or how often words are experienced in the language. It is not clear, however, whether word frequency would affect JOLs when other cues are also available. The current study aims to close this gap by testing whether objective and subjective word frequency affect JOLs in the presence of font size as an additional cue. Across three experiments, participants studied words that varied in word frequency (Experiment 1: high and low objective frequency; Experiment 2: a whole continuum from high to low objective frequency; Experiment 3: high and low subjective and objective frequency) and were presented in a large (48pt) or a small (18pt) font size, made JOLs, and completed a free recall test. Results showed that people based their JOLs on both word frequency and font size. We conclude that word frequency is an important cue that affects metamemory even in multiple-cue situations.

Spacing Effects on Implicit Picture Memory

1998 ◽  
Vol 86 (2) ◽  
pp. 396-398
Author(s):  
Norihiko Kitao
Keyword(s):  
Free Recall ◽  
Recall Test ◽  
Perceptual Identification ◽  
Free Recall Test ◽  
Perceptual Cues ◽  
Test Analysis ◽  
Picture Memory ◽  
Spacing Effects ◽  
Short Period ◽  
Identification Test

25 undergraduates studied the stimulus pictures of common objects successively presented as spaced or massed repetitions, or one at a time. Immediately after a study period, they were given a free-recall test followed by a perceptual identification test. Analysis indicated that spacing effects were observed on the free-recall test but not in perceptual identification. On the later test, each stimulus picture was exposed for a short period and subjects were more likely to use perceptual cues than on first the test. Thus, the spacing effects on memory may be eliminated at test as there is no benefit of conceptual cues.

Effects of Modality of Presentation on Delayed Recognition

1977 ◽  
Vol 45 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1203-1210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randall W. Engle ◽  
Elizabeth D. Durban
Keyword(s):  
Free Recall ◽  
Recognition Test ◽  
Recall Test ◽  
Visual Presentation ◽  
Auditory Presentation ◽  
Free Recall Test ◽  
Modality Effects ◽  
Delayed Recognition

Auditorily and visually presented lists were either tested or not tested immediately after input and were later tested on a delayed recognition test. For those lists given the immediate free-recall test, auditory presentation was superior on this immediate test. On the delayed recognition test the tested lists led to higher performance than non-tested lists. For tested lists auditory presentation led to superior recognition for the terminal serial positions, while for non-tested lists visual presentation led to higher performance on the last few positions. The fact that modality of presentation had opposite effects on delayed recognition of the lists was discussed in terms of current models of modality effects.

scholarly journals Studying texts in a second language: The importance of test type

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 1062-1074 ◽  
Author(s):  
HELEEN VANDER BEKEN ◽  
MARC BRYSBAERT
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Free Recall ◽  
Recognition Test ◽  
Recall Test ◽  
Expository Texts ◽  
Free Recall Test ◽  
Information Encoding ◽  
Dominant Language ◽  
Lower Performance ◽  
L1 And L2

Little is known about the extent to which information encoding and retrieval differ between materials studied in first and second language (L1 and L2). In this study we compared memory for short, expository texts in L1 and L2, tested with a free recall test and a true/false judgement test. Our results show that students performed at the same level on the recognition test in both languages but not on the free recall test, with much lower performance in L2 than in L1, defined here as the dominant language. The L2 recall cost suggests that students’ performance may be underestimated if they are exclusively tested with essay-type exams in L2.

scholarly journals Free recall test experience potentiates strategy-driven effects of value on memory.

2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (10) ◽  
pp. 1581-1601 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael S. Cohen ◽  
Jesse Rissman ◽  
Mariam Hovhannisyan ◽  
Alan D. Castel ◽  
Barbara J. Knowlton
Keyword(s):  
Free Recall ◽  
Recall Test ◽  
Free Recall Test

Effects of Between-Item, Within-Item, and Autobiographical Elaborations on Incidental Free Recall

1997 ◽  
Vol 85 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1279-1287 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiroshi Toyota
Keyword(s):  
Free Recall ◽  
Recall Test ◽  
Free Recall Test

Effects of types of elaboration on incidental free recall were investigated. The subjects performed an orienting task involving three rating conditions followed by an unexpected free recall test. Three rating conditions were designed to force between-item elaboration, within-item elaboration, and autobiographical elaboration. Between-item elaboration led to better recall than autobiographical elaboration, which in turn led to better recall than within-item elaboration. The above result was discussed in terms of both generative and discriminative processes in retrieval.

Effects of Notetaking Pretraining and Test Mode Expectations on Learning from Lectures

1981 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 385-397 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol A. Carrier ◽  
Amy Titus
Keyword(s):  
High School Students ◽  
Free Recall ◽  
Recall Test ◽  
Choice Test ◽  
Free Recall Test ◽  
Multiple Choice Test ◽  
School Students ◽  
Test Mode ◽  
Independent Variables ◽  
Essay Test

Effects of pretraining subjects to use a notetaking system while listening to a lecture were compared with those of giving subjects no pretraining. A second variable was test mode expectation: One-third of the subjects were told they would be given a multiple-choice test; another third of the subjects, an essay test; the final third were told only that they would be tested. A 35-item objective test was given immediately after the lecture and a free recall test was given one week after the lecture. The design was a 2 × 3 factorial with a total of 100 high school students serving as subjects. ANOVAs on performance scores for the objective and free recall tests and scores reflecting the efficiency of the notes themselves showed several significant interactions between the two independent variables. From this study and others, recommendations for educators who wish to improve the notetaking skills of students are included.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document