ABSTRACT

Taking a test on studied materials results in better delayed recall performance than restudying (a.k.a. the testing effect). A common finding in testing effect research is that the effect depends on test format: the magnitude of the testing effect differs between free-recall, cued-recall, and recognition testing. This is explained by the effortful retrieval hypothesis: effortful successful retrieval results in better memory for an item than less effortful successful retrieval. However, the assumption that successful retrieval on different types of tests requires different levels of effort has not yet been tested. To test this assumption, we measured perceived mental effort on different test formats. Participants indicated free-recall was more effortful than cued-recall, and cued-recall more effortful than recognition. Furthermore, cued and free-recall yielded better cued-recall performance on a one-week delayed test than restudy or recognition. The results support the assumption that different practice test formats require different levels of mental effort.

摘要

对所研究的材料进行测试会比重新学习具有更好的延迟召回性能（又称测试效果））。测试效果研究中的一个常见发现是效果取决于测试格式：测试效果的大小在自由召回，提示召回和识别测试之间有所不同。省力的检索假设对此进行了解释：与省力的成功检索相比，省力的成功检索对项目的记忆力更好。但是，关于在不同类型的测试中成功检索需要不同级别的工作这一假设尚未得到检验。为了检验这个假设，我们在不同的考试形式上测量了感知的精神努力。与会者指出，自由召回比提示召回更加省力，而提示召回比认受更加省力。此外，暗示和自由回忆在为期一周的延迟测试中产生的暗示回忆性能要比重新学习或识别更好。