Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38376029›Full record

ArticleBrain and behavior2024

Lower constraint testing enhances the testing effect for some contextual details but not others.

Konstadena L Giannakopoulos, Matthew P McCurdy, Allison M Sklenar, Andrea N Frankenstein, Pauline Urban Levy, Eric D Leshikar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain and behavior, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

Konstadena L GiannakopoulosUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Matthew P McCurdyUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Allison M SklenarUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Andrea N FrankensteinUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Pauline Urban LevyUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Eric D LeshikarUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5099-841X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRetrieval practice has been shown to be an effective means of learning new information, a memory phenomenon known as the testing effect or the retrieval practice effect. Some work suggests that the magnitude of the testing effect can be enhanced when the test used for retrieval practice uses fewer cues to retrieve previously studied information. It is unclear, however, whether such testing benefits extend to peripheral contextual details associated with studied materials (e.g., location where stimuli appear, font color in which items are presented, etc.). In this experiment, we examine both item memory (i.e., memory for the studied items) and context memory under conditions where the intervening test offers fewer cues (i.e., lower constraint) compared to more cues (higher constraint) to better understand item and context memory testing effects.

methodsParticipants first studied word pairs presented in one of eight locations as well as in either red or green font color. Then, in the re-exposure phase, participants processed materials in two types of intervening tests (lower constraint and a higher constraint test) as well as in a restudy condition, before a final memory test.

resultsFor item memory, results showed that memory was better in the lower constraint testing condition compared to both the higher constraint testing condition as well as the restudy (control) condition. For context memory, results indicated improved memory for location context under lower constraint testing compared to both higher constraint testing and restudy conditions. There was no difference in memory, however, for color context across all conditions.

conclusionOverall, these findings suggest that providing fewer cues to aid retrieval in the intervening test can induce better memory for both items as well as some contextual details.

Indexed as

LearningMental RecallCuesHumanscontext memoryitem memorylocation memoryretrieval practicespatial memorytest constraintstesting effect

Identifiers

PMID38376029
PMCPMC10776958

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.