Cited by 111Memory Processes and InfluencesMemory and Neural MechanismsCognitive Functions and Memory

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 97 of the 98 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet.

Neural correlates of retrieval-based memory enhancement: An fMRI study of the testing effect

Open access

Abstract

Restudying material is a common method for learning new information, but not necessarily an effective one. Research on the testing effect shows that practice involving retrieval from memory can facilitate later memory in contrast to passive restudy. Despite extensive behavioral work, the brain processes that make retrieval an effective learning strategy remain unclear. In the present experiment, we explored how initially retrieving items affected memory a day later as compared to a condition involving traditional restudy. In contrast to restudy, initial testing that contributed to future memory success was associated with engagement of several regions including the anterior hippocampus, lateral temporal cortices, and medial prefrontal cortex (PFC). Additionally, testing enhanced hippocampal connectivity with ventrolateral PFC and midline regions. These findings indicate that the testing effect may be contingent on processes that are typically thought to support memory success at encoding (e.g. relational binding, selection and elaboration of semantically-related information) in addition to those more often associated with retrieval (e.g. memory search).

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.04.004

Cites

97 of 98 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 97 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 111

Metadata

Authors
Wing, E. A., Marsh, E. J., & Cabeza, R.
Affiliations
Duke University (US)
Corresponding author
Wing, Erik A.
Venue
Neuropsychologia
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-10
Volume
51
Issue
12
Pages
2360-2370
ISSN
0028-3932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2112760334
Cited by
111
References
97
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3
FWCI
3.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuropsychologia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (R56AG023770, R56 AG23770)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
testing effect, retrieval practice, restudy, memory enhancement, neural correlates, anterior hippocampus, medial prefrontal cortex, ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, hippocampal connectivity, memory search, relational binding, semantic elaboration
MeSH terms
Brain Mapping, Hippocampus, Humans, Learning, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Memory, Neural Pathways, Mental Recall, Temporal Lobe, Prefrontal Cortex

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