Cited by 128Memory Processes and InfluencesMemory and Neural MechanismsCategorization, perception, and language

Test-enhanced learning of natural concepts: effects on recognition memory, classification, and metacognition

Jacoby, Larry L., Wahlheim, Christopher N., Coane, Jennifer H.·2010·Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition

Abstract

Three experiments examined testing effects on learning of natural concepts and metacognitive assessments of such learning. Results revealed that testing enhanced recognition memory and classification accuracy for studied and novel exemplars of bird families on immediate and delayed tests. These effects depended on the balance of study and test trials during training. Metacognitive measures provided results suggesting that participants were aware of the beneficial effects of testing. A new measure of metacognition at the level of categories is introduced and shown to be potentially useful for theory and applied purposes. It is argued that focusing on optimizing the learning of natural concepts encourages the convergence of theorizing about memory, concept learning, and metacognition and holds promise for the development of applications to education.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0020636

Cites

37 of 37 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?

  • The benefits of testing have been shown to support non-verbal visual and spatial information, including locations on maps, identifying birds, name-face associations, statistics, and spatial locations of objects.

    “However, the benefits of testing have been shown to support non-verbal visual and spatial information, including locations on maps (Carpenter and Pashler, 2007; Rohrer et al., 2010), identifying birds (Jacoby et al., 2010), name-face associations (Morris and Fritz, 2002; Helder and Shaughnessy, 2008), statistics (Szpunar et al., 2013), and spatial locations of objects (Sommer et al., 2008).”

    From Neural Correlates of Long-Term Memory Enhancement Following Retrieval Practice (2021) · cites this paper as Jacoby et al., 2010

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jacoby, L. L., Wahlheim, C. N., & Coane, J. H.
Affiliations
Washington University in St. Louis (US)
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition
Published
2010-11
Volume
36
Issue
6
Pages
1441-1451
ISSN
  • 0278-7393 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1285
OpenAlex
W2113098345
Cited by
127
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 4
FWCI
3.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • NC Digital Online Collection of Knowledge and Scholarship (The University of North Carolina at Greensboro) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Ames S. McDonnell Foundation (22020166)
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 › Categorization, perception, and language
Keywords
retrieval practice, natural concepts, recognition memory, classification accuracy, metacognition, metacognitive awareness, bird families, concept learning
MeSH terms
Cognition, Feedback, Generalization, Psychological, Genetic Testing, Humans, Judgment, Learning, Neuropsychological Tests, Probability, Students, Teaching, Universities, Signal Detection, Psychological, Recognition, Psychology

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