In this study, 17 adult participants were trained to solve alphabet-arithmetic problems using a production task (e.g., C + 3 = ?). The evolution of their performance across 12 practice sessions was compared to the results obtained in past studies using verification tasks (e.g., is C + 3 = F correct?). We show that, irrespective of the experimental paradigm used, there is no evidence for a shift from counting to retrieval during training. However and again regardless of the paradigm, problems with the largest addend constitute an exception to the general pattern of results obtained. Contrary to other problems, their answers seem to be deliberately memorized by participants relatively early during training. All in all, we conclude that verification and production tasks lead to similar patterns of results, which can therefore both confidently be used to discuss current theories of learning. Still, deliberate memorization of problems with the largest addend appears earlier and more often in a production than a verification task. This last result is discussed in light of retrieval models.

在这项研究中，17 名成年参与者接受了使用生产任务（例如，C + 3 = ?）解决字母算术问题的培训。他们在 12 次练习中的表现演变与过去使用验证任务（例如，C + 3 = F 是否正确？）的研究中获得的结果进行了比较。我们表明，无论使用何种实验范式，都没有证据表明训练期间从计数转变为检索。然而，无论范式如何，具有最大加数的问题构成了所获得结果的一般模式的例外。与其他问题相反，他们的答案似乎是在培训期间相对较早的参与者故意记住的。总而言之，我们得出结论，验证和生产任务会导致类似的结果模式，因此，它们都可以自信地用于讨论当前的学习理论。尽管如此，与验证任务相比，对具有最大加数的问题的刻意记忆在生产中出现得更早也更频繁。根据检索模型讨论最后一个结果。