Cited by 272Memory Processes and InfluencesCognitive Functions and MemoryMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Application of the testing and spacing effects to name learning

Carpenter, Shana K., DeLosh, Edward L.·2005·Applied Cognitive Psychology

Abstract

Four experiments investigated the effects of testing and spacing on the learning of face-name stimulus-response pairs. Experiments 1a and 1b compared the recall of names following intervening tests versus additional study opportunities and found that testing produced better retention of names. Experiments 2 and 3 explored the effects of repeated tests versus study for massed, uniform, or expanded spacing intervals. Tested names were better retained than studied names, spaced names were better retained than massed names, and memory was best for items tested at spaced intervals. Contrary to past findings, expanded schedules did not yield better memory than uniform schedules in either experiment. Theoretical implications for the testing and spacing effects are discussed, along with effective name-learning techniques based on these principles. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/acp.1101

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Pretesting enhances subsequent learning by activating prior knowledge, revealing knowledge gaps, and sharpening attention to critical information encountered later.

    “a substantial body of research demonstrates that pretesting enhances subsequent learning by activating prior knowledge, revealing knowledge gaps, and sharpening attention to critical information encountered later [2, 9, 11-13].”
  • Practice testing improves retention more than restudying does.

    “This basic type of practice testing already improves retention more than restudying does, indicating a direct effect of active retrieval on memory (e.g., Carpenter & DeLosh, 2005).”

    From Predicting as a learning strategy (2021) · cites this paper as Carpenter & DeLosh, 2005

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 51 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Carpenter, S. K., & DeLosh, E. L.
Affiliations
Colorado State University (US)
Corresponding author
Carpenter, Shana K.
Venue
Applied Cognitive Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005
Volume
19
Issue
5
Pages
619-636
ISSN
  • 0888-4080 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-0720
OpenAlex
W2140172821
Cited by
270
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 15
FWCI
3.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Applied Cognitive Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
testing effect, spacing effect, stimulus-response learning, retention, memory enhancement

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review