The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Test-enhanced learning of natural concepts: effects on recognition memory, classification, and metacognition
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.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“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
Citations
Cites
Detection Theory: A User's Guide
Macmillan, N. A., & Creelman, C. D. (1991) · Cited by 5,415
Cognitive representations of semantic categories.
Rosch, E. H. (1975) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.192 · Cited by 4,993
Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain
Bloom, B., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1966) · Cited by 4,624
Context theory of classification learning
Medin, D. L., & Schaffer, M. M. (1978) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.85.3.207 · Cited by 3,061
Rosch, E. H., & Lloyd, B. (2024) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781032633275 · Cited by 2,869
Test-Enhanced Learning: Taking Memory Tests Improves Long-Term Retention
Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x · Cited by 2,867
Murphy, G. L. (2002) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/1602.001.0001 · Cited by 2,650
Similarity and Analogical Reasoning
(1989) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511529863 · Cited by 2,416
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
On the genesis of abstract ideas.
Posner, M. I., & Keele, S. W. (1968) · Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0025953 · Cited by 1,983
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100612453266 · Cited by 3,138
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
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
Ten Benefits of Testing and Their Applications to Educational Practice
Roediger, H. L., III, Putnam, A. L., & Smith, M. A. (2011) · The Psychology of learning and motivation/The psychology of learning and motivation · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-387691-1.00001-6 · Cited by 496
Testing (quizzing) boosts classroom learning: a systematic and meta-analytic review
Yang, C., Luo, L., Vadillo, M. A., Yu, R., & Shanks, D. R. (2021) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000309 · Cited by 333
Metadata
- 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
