Limitations to the Spacing Effect
Demonstration of an Inverted u-Shaped Relationship Between Interrepetition Spacing and Free Recall
Abstract
Abstract. The spacing effect refers to the finding that memory for repeated items improves when the interrepetition interval increases. To explain the spacing effect in free-recall tasks, a two-factor model has been put forward that combines mechanisms of contextual variability and study-phase retrieval (e.g., Raaijmakers, 2003; Verkoeijen, Rikers, & Schmidt, 2004). An important, yet untested, implication of this model is that free recall of repetitions should follow an inverted u-shaped relationship with interrepetition spacing. To demonstrate the suggested relationship an experiment was conducted. Participants studied a word list, consisting of items repeated at different interrepetition intervals, either under incidental or under intentional learning instructions. Subsequently, participants received a free-recall test. The results revealed an inverted u-shaped relationship between free recall and interrepetition spacing in both the incidental-learning condition and the intentional-learning condition. Moreover, for intentionally learned repetitions, the maximum free-recall performance was located at a longer interrepetition interval than for incidentally learned repetitions. These findings are interpreted in terms of the two-factor model of spacing effects in free-recall tasks.
References
(1993). Spacing effects on cued-memory tests depend on level of processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 389– 396
(1982). When forgetting helps memory: An analysis of repetition effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21, 451– 467
(1985). Surface form and the spacing effect. Memory & Cognition, 13(6), 529– 537
(1996). Distributing and managing the conditions of encoding and practice. In E. L. Bjork & R. A. Bjork (Eds.), Memory (pp. 317-344). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
(1979). Component-levels theory of the effects of spacing of repetition on recall and recognition. Memory & Cognition, 7, 95– 112
(1987). Influence of paraphrased repetitions on the spacing effect. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 198– 199
(1989). Spacing effects in memory: Evidence for a two-process account. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 371– 377
(1990). Spacing effects on implicit memory tests. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 1004– 1011
(1974). Theoretical implications of the spacing effect. In R. L. Solso (Ed.), Theories in cognitive psychology: The Loyola Symposium (pp. 77-99). Potomac, MD, Erlbaum.
(1976). Repetition and memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 10, pp. 47-91). New York: Academic Press.
(1973). Memory for the spacing of repetitions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 99, 70– 74
(1975). Spacing judgments as an index of study-phase retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1, 31– 40
(1978). On interpreting the effects of repetition: Solving a problem versus remembering a solution. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 649– 667
(1976). The contributions of encoding effort and variability to the spacing effect on free recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 2, 153– 160
(1969). Intraserial repetition and coding processes in free recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 8, 828– 835
(2004). A short-term perceptual priming account of spacing effects in explicit cued-memory tasks for unfamiliar stimuli. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16, 387– 402
(2002). Spacing effects in cued-memory tasks for unfamiliar faces and nonwords. Memory & Cognition, 30, 1238– 1251
(1967). Repetition and retrieval from memory. Science, 158, 532–
(1963). Effect of spacing presentations on retention on a paired associate over short intervals. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1963, 206– 209
(2003). Spacing and repetition effects in human memory: Application of the SAM model. Cognitive Science, 27, 431– 452
(2002). Spacing effect in recognition memory: When meaning matters. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 14, 49– 59
(2002). Toward a unified account of spacing effects in explicit cued-memory tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 819– 829
(1998). Revising current two-process accounts of spacing effects in memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 161– 172
(1976). Effects of repetition as a function of study-phase retrieval. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 9, 529– 537
(2002). The spacing effect, free recall, and two-process theory: A closer look. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 437– 444
(2002). The spacing effect in the free recall of homogenous lists: Present and accounted for. Memory & Cognition, 30, 601– 606
(1969). Some correlates of item repetition in free recall learning. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 8, 83– 94
(1975). Woordfrequentie in geschreven en gesproken Nederlands. [Frequent words in written and spoken Dutch]. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Oosthoek, Scheltema & Holkema.
(2004). Detrimental influence of contextual change on spacing effects in free recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 796– 800
(1971). Reinforcement-test intervals in paired-associate learning. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 8, 58– 81
