Cited by 77

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The effectiveness of four mnemonics in ordering recall.

Roediger, Henry L.·1980·Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory

Abstract

150 undergraduates were given instructions in using 1 of 4 mnemonic techniques: imagery, the link method, a peg system, or the method of loci. Relative to controls, all mnemonic groups showed an advantage in memorizing 20-word lists for unordered recall. However, the greatest differences appeared when recall was scored by a strict positional criterion whereby Ss received credit for recalling a word only when it was placed in its correct position. By this scoring method, peg and loci Ss performed best on an immediate test, and imagery and control Ss, worst. Performance of Ss told to use linking images was intermediate. Mnemonic devices have greater effects on the ordering of recall than on the number of words that can be recalled without regard to order. Some experimental failures to show that mnemonic devices are effective may have been due to testing only item information. (24 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved)

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0278-7393.6.5.558

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Roediger, H. L.
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory
Published
1980-09
Volume
6
Issue
5
Pages
558-567
ISSN
0096-1515
Cited by
77
References
0
Language
en

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