The testing effect in recognition memory: A dual process account.
Abstract
The testing effect, or the finding that taking an initial test improves subsequent memory performance, is a robust and reliable phenomenon--as long as the final test involves recall. Few studies have examined the effects of taking an initial recall test on final recognition performance, and results from these studies are equivocal. In 3 experiments, we attempt to demonstrate that initial testing can change the ways in which later recognition decisions are executed even when no difference can be detected in the recognition hit rates. Specifically, initial testing was shown to enhance later recollection but leave familiarity unchanged. This conclusion emerged from three dependent measures: source memory, exclusion performance, and remember/know judgments.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Even when a testing effect cannot be seen in overall recognition performance, there is evidence of the testing effect in the recollection component of recognition.
“It appears, though, that even when a testing effect cannot be seen in overall recognition performance, if one breaks down the components of recognition into recollection and familiarity (using methods developed under the dual process framework; see Yonelinas 2002), there is evidence of the testing effect in the recollection component (Chan & McDermott 2007).”
From Practicing Retrieval Facilitates Learning (2021) · cites this paper as Chan & McDermott 2007
Cites
Tulving, E. (1985) · Canadian Psychology / Psychologie canadienne · doi:10.1037/h0080017 · Cited by 4,638 · see citing works
The power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice
Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00012.x · Cited by 2,037 · see citing works
Effects of prior free recall testing on final recall and recognition.
Darley, C. F., & Murdock, B. B. (1971) · Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0031836 · Cited by 156 · see citing works
The effect of recall upon recognition.
Hanawalt, N. G., & Tarr, A. G. (1961) · Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0041917 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The effect of testing versus restudy on retention: A meta-analytic review of the testing effect.
Rowland, C. A. (2014) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0037559 · Cited by 1,066 · see citing works
Rethinking the Use of Tests: A Meta-Analysis of Practice Testing
Adesope, O. O., Trevisan, D. A., & Sundararajan, N. (2017) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654316689306 · Cited by 544 · see citing works
Retrieval-Based Learning: A Decade of Progress
Karpicke, J. D. (2017) · Learning and Memory: A Comprehensive Reference · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-809324-5.21055-9 · Cited by 223 · see citing works
Practicing Retrieval Facilitates Learning
McDermott, K. B. (2021) · Annual review of psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010419-051019 · Cited by 113 · see citing works
Self-citationIndividual differences in the effects of retrieval from long-term memory
Brewer, G. A., & Unsworth, N. (2012) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2011.12.009 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Neural correlates of retrieval-based memory enhancement: an fMRI study of the testing effect
Wing, E. A., Marsh, E. J., & Cabeza, R. (2013) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.04.004 · Cited by 111 · see citing works
Reagh, Z. M., & Ranganath, C. (2018) · Neuroscience Letters · doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2018.04.050 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
The testing effect under divided attention.
Buchin, Z. L., & Mulligan, N. W. (2017) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition · doi:10.1037/xlm0000427 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
- Authors
- Chan, J. C. K., & McDermott, K. B.
- Affiliations
- Washington University in St. Louis (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
- Published
- 2007
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 431-437
- ISSN
- 0278-7393 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1285
- OpenAlex
- W2040065186
- Cited by
- 175
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 2.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- James S. McDonnell Foundation (220020041)
- 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, recognition memory, dual-process models, recollection, familiarity, source memory, remember-know judgments, memory enhancement
- MeSH terms
- Attention, Cues, Humans, Practice, Psychological, Problem Solving, Mental Recall, Retention, Psychology, Verbal Learning
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
