ArticleCognition2022
Learning from errors: Exploration of the monitoring learning effect.
Article in Cognition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- The serial order system in word production and working memory: A case series approach.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2025Article
- Effect of Fatigue on Word Production in Aphasia.CogSci ... Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Cognitive Science Society (U.S.). Conference · 2024Article
- Mimicking effects of auditory verbal hallucinations on language production at the level of words, sentences and stories.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The present study examined spontaneous detection and repair of naming errors in people with aphasia to advance a theoretical understanding of how monitoring impacts learning in lexical access. Prior work in aphasia has found that spontaneous repair, but not mere detection without repair, of semantic naming errors leads to improved naming on those same items in the future when other factors are accounted for. The present study sought to replicate this finding in a new, larger sample of participants and to examine the critical role of self-generated repair in this monitoring learning effect. Twenty-four participants with chronic aphasia with naming impairment provided naming responses to a 660-item corpus of common, everyday objects at two timepoints. At the first timepoint, a randomly selected subset of trials ended in experimenter-provided corrective feedback. Each naming trial was coded for accuracy, error type, and for any monitoring behavior that occurred, specifically detection with repair (i.e., correction), detection without repair, and no detection. Focusing on semantic errors, the original monitoring learning effect was replicated, with enhanced accuracy at a future timepoint when the first trial with that item involved detection with repair, compared to error trials that were not detected. This enhanced accuracy resulted from learning that arose from the first trial rather than the presence of repair simply signifying easier items. A second analysis compared learning from trials of self-corrected errors to that of trials ending in feedback that were detected but not self-corrected and found enhanced learning after self-generated repair. Implications for theories of lexical access and monitoring are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.