Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37153935›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in behavioral neuroscience2023

Performance feedback enhances test-potentiated encoding.

Petra Ludowicy, Pedro M Paz-Alonso, Thomas Lachmann, Daniela Czernochowski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  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

4 authors.

Petra LudowicyCognitive and Developmental Psychology Unit, Center for Cognitive Science, University of Kaiserslautern-Landau (RPTU), Kaiserslautern, Germany.
Pedro M Paz-AlonsoBCBL, Basque Center on Cognition, Brain and Language, San Sebastian, Spain.
Thomas LachmannCognitive and Developmental Psychology Unit, Center for Cognitive Science, University of Kaiserslautern-Landau (RPTU), Kaiserslautern, Germany.
Daniela CzernochowskiCognitive Neuroscience Unit, Center for Cognitive Science, University of Kaiserslautern-Landau (RPTU), Kaiserslautern, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Long-term memory retention is enhanced after testing compared to restudying (testing effect). Notably, memory retrieval further improves when correct-answer feedback is provided after the retrieval attempt (test-potentiated encoding-TPE). Methods: To evaluate whether explicit positive or negative feedback further enhances memory performance beyond the effect of TPE, in two experiments additional explicit positive or negative performance-contingent feedback was presented before providing correct-answer feedback. After an initial exposure to the full material, 40 participants learned 210 weakly associated cue-target word pairs by either restudying or testing (Experiment 1). Depending on the accuracy of the retrieval attempt, the tested word pairs were followed by positive or negative performance feedback (50%) or no feedback (50%). Irrespective of the type of repetition, trials were followed by a restudy opportunity. Participants returned to perform a final cued-recall test (Day 2). Results: Final test results replicated the testing effect (better memory performance for tested compared to restudied items). Explicit performance feedback in addition to correct-answer feedback increased retrieval performance, but only on Day 2. This pattern of results was replicated in Experiment 2 in an independent sample of 25 participants. To assess the specific effects of learning history, we also examined retrieval accuracy and reaction times during repetition cycles: Explicit feedback improved retrieval for material successfully encoded in the initial study phase (consistent positive feedback) as well as for material learned during the repetition phase (mixed positive and negative feedback). Discussion: Performance feedback improves learning beyond the effects of retrieval practice and correct-answer feedback, suggesting that it strengthens memory representations and promotes re-encoding of the material.

Indexed as

episodic memoryfeedbackreinforcement learningretrievaltesting effecttest-potentiated learning

Identifiers

PMID37153935
PMCPMC10157468

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.