Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36633821›Full record

ArticleMemory & cognition2023

Guessing can benefit memory for related word pairs even when feedback is delayed.

Katarzyna Zawadzka, Oliwia Zaborowska, Ewa Butowska, Krzysztof Piątkowski, Maciej Hanczakowski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Memory & cognition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Katarzyna ZawadzkaAdam Mickiewicz University, ul. Szamarzewskiego 89AB, 60-568, Poznań, Poland. k.n.zawadzka@gmail.com.
Oliwia ZaborowskaSWPS University, ul. Chodakowska 19/31, 03-815, Warsaw, Poland.
Ewa ButowskaSWPS University, ul. Chodakowska 19/31, 03-815, Warsaw, Poland.
Krzysztof PiątkowskiSWPS University, ul. Chodakowska 19/31, 03-815, Warsaw, Poland.
Maciej HanczakowskiAdam Mickiewicz University, ul. Szamarzewskiego 89AB, 60-568, Poznań, Poland. maciej.hanczakowski@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Trying to guess what the correct answer to a question might be can facilitate future learning of this answer when presented in the form of corrective feedback. One issue that determines the effectiveness of guessing as a learning strategy is the timing of the presentation of feedback: it can be presented either immediately after the guess, or after a delay. Whereas the timing of feedback is of little importance for complex materials such as trivia questions, previous research suggests that for simpler materials such as related word pairs guessing seems to benefit learning only when feedback is immediate. In order to test whether this always has to be the case, we conducted two experiments in which we increased the richness of study materials by superimposing the to-be-learned word pairs over unrelated context pictures. We then manipulated the match between contexts at study and at test (Experiment 1) and at the time of feedback delivery (Experiment 2). Contrary to previous studies showing no benefits of guessing with delayed feedback, our results show that learning related word pairs can benefit from guessing even when feedback is delayed. These benefits of guessing occur if participants are reminded via reinstated contexts of the guessing stage at the time of feedback delivery. Our results help constrain theories of guessing benefits and extend theories of reminding.

Indexed as

Formative FeedbackLanguageMental RecallUncertaintyAdolescentAdultCuesHumansMiddle AgedTime FactorsYoung AdultFeedbackJudgments of learningRetrievalTesting

Identifiers

PMID36633821
PMCPMC10285020

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.