Cited by 30Memory Processes and InfluencesCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skillsVisual and Cognitive Learning Processes

Calculator use need not undermine direct-access ability: The roles of retrieval, calculation, and calculator use in the acquisition of arithmetic facts.

Pyke, Aryn A., LeFevre, Jo-Anne·2011·Journal of Educational Psychology

Abstract

Why is subsequent recall sometimes better for self-generated answers than for answers obtained from an external source (e.g., calculator)? In this study, we explore the relative contribution of 2 processes, recall attempts and self-computation, to this generation effect (i.e., enhanced answer recall relative to when problems are practiced with a calculator). Adults (N = 36) practiced unfamiliar alphabet arithmetic problems (A + 4 = ?; answer E), in 3 learning conditions: self-generating answers through recall or counting (self-generate learning), obtaining answers with a customized calculator (calculator-only learning), or using a calculator after first attempting answer recall (retrieve-else-calculator learning). Subsequently, participants were tested without a calculator. Retrieve-else-calculator learning was expected to produce an intermediate level of performance because it captures the benefits of recall attempts but excludes any benefits of the other self-generation process (mental computation). However, retrieve-else-calculator learning proved as effective as self-generation learning (latency, accuracy, and recall rates on test), and both led to a test performance that was superior to calculator-only learning. We suggest that mental generation processes that involve the retrieval of intermediate products may introduce retrieval interference that precludes a strong contribution to the generation effect. However, tedious mental computation may contribute to superior access indirectly, by inciting automatic recall attempts. This effect can be mimicked by imposing a delay prior to calculator use. Our results are compatible with the view that learning contexts that promote recall activities produce a customized type of knowledge to support cued-recall (Rickard & Bajic, 2006).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0023291

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Using a calculator in an alphanumerical test led to higher response accuracy but worse subsequent recall of the solution, leading to the conclusion that calculator use results in less active learning than self-generating answers.

    “Pyke and LeFevre (2011) observed that using a calculator in an alphanumerical test led to a higher response accuracy but in return to a worse subsequent recall of the solution. They therefore concluded that using a calculator results in less active learning than self-generating answers.”

    From Consequences of cognitive offloading: Boosting performance but diminishing memory (2021) · cites this paper as Pyke & LeFevre, 2011

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pyke, A. A., & LeFevre, J.-A.
Venue
Journal of Educational Psychology
Published
2011-08
Volume
103
Issue
3
Pages
607-616
ISSN
  • 0022-0663 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2176
OpenAlex
W1982937712
Cited by
30
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
0.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Educational Psychology (publishedVersion)
Funders
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
Keywords
arithmetic fact learning, calculator use, generation effect, mental arithmetic, retrieval interference, arithmetic fact retrieval, cued recall

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