Effect of spacing presentations on retention of a paired associate over short intervals.
Abstract
3 experiments varying the interval between 2 presentations of paired associates were reported. Other pairs filled the spacing and retention intervals. Pairs consisting of a word and a number as well as pairs consisting of 2 words showed a superiority at 8 sec. and longer retention intervals when presentations were spaced. Increasing the spacing interval beyond 8 sec. did not increase recall, when a 2-sec. rate of presentation was used. A 2-factor explanation of the findings was suggested, in which cue learning was the major factor influencing recall at longer retention intervals, while a 2nd factor was confounded with cue learning at short retention intervals. An initial investigation varying the time interval between two presentations of an individual pair of associates has been reported (Peterson, Hillner, & Saltzman, 1962). Using a technique described earlier (Peterson,
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?
Peterson, Wampler, Kirkpatrick, and Saltzman (1963) failed to find a massing benefit at retention intervals of 8, 16, or 60 sec.
“Peterson, Wampler, Kirkpatrick, and Saltzman (1963) failed to find a massing benefit at retention intervals of 8, 16, or 60 sec.”
From Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. (2006) · cites this paper as Peterson, Wampler, Kirkpatrick, and Saltzman (1963)
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Human Memory: A Proposed System and its Control Processes
Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968) · Psychology of Learning and Motivation · doi:10.1016/s0079-7421(08)60422-3 · Cited by 7,216 · see citing works
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 · see citing works
Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis.
Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.354 · Cited by 1,888 · see citing works
Learning Versus Performance: An Integrative Review
Soderstrom, N. C., & Bjork, R. A. (2015) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691615569000 · Cited by 651 · see citing works
Component-levels theory of the effects of spacing of repetitions on recall and recognition
Glenberg, A. M. (1979) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/bf03197590 · Cited by 444 · see citing works
Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2007) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition · doi:10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.704 · Cited by 421 · see citing works
Optimizing distributed practice
Cepeda, N. J., Coburn, N., Rohrer, D., Wixted, J. T., Mozer, M. C., & Pashler, H. (2009) · Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1027/1618-3169.56.4.236 · Cited by 296 · see citing works
(2010) · Psychology of Learning and Motivation · doi:10.1016/s0079-7421(10)53003-2 · Cited by 255 · see citing works
Spacing practice sessions across days benefits the learning of motor skills
Shea, C. H., Lai, Q., Black, C., & Park, J.-H. (2000) · Human Movement Science · doi:10.1016/s0167-9457(00)00021-x · Cited by 224 · see citing works
Encoding processes and the spacing effect
Bellezza, F. S., Winkler, H. B., & Andrasik, F. (1975) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/bf03212940 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Quantitative prediction of spacing effects in learning
Reed, A. V. (1977) · Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(77)80028-5 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
- Authors
- Peterson, L. R., Wampler, R., Kirkpatrick, M., & Saltzman, D.
- Affiliations
- Indiana University (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Psychology
- Published
- 1963-08
- Volume
- 66
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 206-209
- ISSN
- 0022-1015 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2166170239
- Cited by
- 117
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 2.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Experimental Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- 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
- paired associates, retention interval, spacing effect, short-term memory, memory retrieval, cue learning, presentation rate, word pairs
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Memory, Paired-Associate Learning, Research Personnel
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
