Voluntary attention and the spacing effect.
Abstract
Three experiments were done to test the hypothesis that the spacing effect results from a voluntary decision by the subject to pay little attention to the second presentation (P2) of an item when it occurs shortly after the first (P(1))- In all three experiments, the spacing of repetitions was varied. In Experiment I, allocation of attention was manipulated by pairing P2 of some pictures with a signal that indicated high payoff for later retention. In Experiment II, attention was controlled more directly by requiring the subject, in one condition, to recite words aloud. In both experiments, the dependent variable was judged frequency. In neither experiment did the effect of the attention manipulation interact with that of the spacing of repetitions. In Experiment III, the number of eye fixations given a picture was taken to be a measure of attention. The number of fixations dropped from P1 to P2 to P3, but was unaffected by the spacing of repetitions. The experiments provide no support for a voluntary attention explanation of the spacing effect.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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 deficient processing account confronts a separate difficulty in the finding that providing rewards for remembering does not reduce distributed practice effects.
“(The deficient processing account confronts a separate difficulty in the finding that providing rewards for remembering does not reduce distributed practice effects; Hintzman, Summers, Eki, & Moore, 1975).”
From Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. (2006) · cites this paper as Hintzman, Summers, Eki, & Moore, 1975
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Theories in Cognitive Psychology: The Loyola Symposium
Wallace, W. P., Laughlin, P. R., & Solso, R. L. (1975) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1421683 · Cited by 726 · see citing works
Theoretical Implications of the Spacing Effect 1
Hintzman, D. L. (2024) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781032722375-5 · Cited by 364 · see citing works
Self-citationEye fixations and recognition memory for pictures
Loftus, G. R. (1972) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(72)90021-7 · Cited by 325 · see citing works
Further evidence on the MP-DP effect in free-recall learning
Shaughnessy, J. J., Zimmerman, J., & Underwood, B. J. (1972) · Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(72)80053-7 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Repetition effects as a function of rehearsal and encoding variability
D’Agostino, P. R., & DeRemer, P. (1973) · Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(73)80066-0 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Isolation of massed- and distributed-practice items
Elmes, D. G., Sanders, L. W., & Dovel, J. C. (1973) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/bf03198073 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Massed and distributed item repetition in verbal discrimination learning.
Ciccone, D. S. (1973) · Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0035242 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
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
Hintzman, D. L. (1976) · Psychology of Learning and Motivation · doi:10.1016/s0079-7421(08)60464-8 · Cited by 388 · see citing works
Self-citationThe advantage of mixing examples in inductive learning: a comparison of three hypotheses
Guzman-Munoz, F. J. (2017) · Educational Psychology · doi:10.1080/01443410.2015.1127331 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Failure to Confirm Elmes, Greener, and Wilkinson's Finding on the Spacing Effect
Hintzman, D. L., & Stern, L. D. (1977) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1421879 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Hintzman, D. L., Summers, J. J., Eki, N. T., & Moore, M. D.
- Affiliations
- University of Oregon (US)
- Venue
- Memory & Cognition
- Published
- 1975-09
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 576-580
- ISSN
- 0090-502X (ISSN-L)
- 1532-5946
- OpenAlex
- W2024468467
- Cited by
- 34
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 1.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Memory & Cognition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
- Keywords
- spacing effect, voluntary attention, attention allocation, retention, eye fixations
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
