Cited by 88Memory Processes and InfluencesReading and Literacy DevelopmentCognitive Functions and Memory

Generating makes words memorable, but so does effective reading

Open access
Begg, Ian, Vinski, Ede, Frankovich, Linda, Holgate, Brian·1991·Memory & Cognition

Abstract

In many experiments, memorial benefits have been found when subjects generate items from fragments rather than read items in their complete forms. Does generation cause this difference, or are subjects disposed to adopt different strategies when generating as opposed to reading? If generating causes the difference, items processed in the same way apart from a generative stage should therefore benefit from that generative stage. Our experiments did result in benefits for generating as opposed to reading, but only when the readers processed the words poorly--by pronouncing them. When the readers processed the items well, by imagining them, generating was no better than reading. A new generation effect was found in metamemory. Subjects thought they would remember more generated items than read items; however, the act of making the prediction entailed meaningful processing, and the generated items were not actually remembered better than the read ones.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3758/bf03199571

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • For unstudied items, generating correct responses has often, though not invariably, been shown to elicit higher JOLs than reading.

    “For unstudied items, generating correct responses has often, though not invariably, been shown to elicit higher JOLs than reading, suggesting that participants are aware of the benefits of generation (e.g., Begg, Vinski, Frankovich, & Holgate, 1991).”

    From The benefit of generating errors during learning (2014) · cites this paper as Begg, Vinski, Frankovich, & Holgate, 1991

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 28

  1. BATflG, W. F., & MONTAGUE, W. E. (1969). Category normsfor verbal items in 56 categories: A replicationand extensionof the Connecticut category norms. Journal of Experimental Psychology Monographs, 80 (3, Pt. 2).
  2. BEGG, I. (1982). Imagery, organization, and discriminative processes. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 36, 273-290.
  3. BEGG, I., DUFf, S., LAWNDE, P., MELNICK, R., & SANVlTO, J. (1989). Memory predictions are based on ease of processing. Journal ofMem- ory &: Language, 28, 610-632.
  4. BEGG, 1., & ROE, H. (1988). On the inhibition of reading by generat- ing. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 42, 325-336.
  5. BEGG, 1., & SNIDER, A. (1987). The generation effect: Evidence for generalized inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learn- ing. Memory. &: Cognition, 13, 553-563.
  6. DoNALDSON, W., & BASS, M. (1980). Relational information and mem- ory for problem solutions. Journal of Verbal Learning &: Verbal Be- havior, 19, 26-35.
  7. EINSTEIN, G. 0., McDANIEL, M. A., BoWERS, C. A.,,, STEVENS, D. T. (1984). Memoryfor prose: The influence of relational and proposition- specific encoding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning. Memory. &: Cognition, 10, 133-143.
  8. GARDINER, J. M., & HAMPTON, J. A. (1985). Semantic memory and the generation effect: Some tests of the lexical activation hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, &: Cogni- tion, 11, 732-741.
  9. GHATALA, E. S. (1981). The effect of internal generation of informa- tion on memory performance. American Journal of Psychology, 94, 443-450.
  10. GHATALA, E. S. (1983). When does internal generation facilitate mem- ory for sentences? American Journal of Psychology, 96, 75-83.
  11. GuSKY, E. L., & RABINOWITZ, J. C. (1985). Enhancing the genera- tion effect through repetition of operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning. Memory, &: Cognition, 11, 193-205.
  12. GRAF, P. (1980). Two consequences of generating: Increasedinter-and intraword organization of sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 19, 316-327.
  13. GRAF, P. (1982). The memorial consequencesof generation and trans- formation. Journal ofVerbalLearning &: VerbalBehavior, 21,539-548.
  14. HIRSHMAN, E., & BJORK, R. A. (1988). The generation effect: Support for a two-factor theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learn- ing, Memory, &: Cognition, 14, 484-494.
  15. HYDE, T. S., "JENKINS, J. J. (1973). Recall for words as a function of semantic, graphic, and syntactic orienting tasks. Journal of Ver- bal Learning &: Verbal Behavior, 12, 471-480.
  16. JACOBY, L. L. (1978). On interpreting the effects of repetition: Solv- inga problemversusremembering a solution. Journal of VerbalLearn- ing &: Verbal Behavior, 17, 649-668.
  17. JACOBY, L. L. (1983). Perceptual enhancement: Persistent effects of an experience. Journal ofExperimental Psychology: Learning, Mem- ory, &: Cognition, 9, 21-38.
  18. JOHNS, E. J., " SWANSON, L. G. (1988). The generation effect with nonwords. Journal ofExperimental Psychology: Learning. Memory, &: Cognition, 14, 180-190.
  19. McDANIEL, M. A.," WADDILL, P. J. (1990). Generation effects for contextwords: Implications for item-specific and multi-factor theories. Journal of Memory &: Language, 29, 201-211.
  20. McELROY, L. A.," SLAMECKA, N. J. (1982). Memorial consequences of generating nonwords: Implications for semantic-memory interpre- tations of the generation effect. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 21, 249-259.
  21. NAIRNE, J. S., " WIDNER, R. L., JR. (1987). Generation effects with nonwords: The role of test appropriateness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 13, 164-171.
  22. P...IVIO. A .• YUILLE. J. C .. .t: M... DIG...N. S. A. (968). Concreteness. imagery. and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns. Journal of Ex- perimental Psychology Monographs. 76 0, Pt. 2).
  23. R... BINOWITZ. J. C.; .t: CUIK. F. I. M. (1986). Specific enhancement effects associated with word generation. Journal of Memory & Lan- guage. 2.5. 226-237.
  24. ScHW"'RTZ, M. (1971). Subject-generated versus experimenter-supplied mediators in paired-associate learning. Journal of Experimental Psy- chology, 87, 389-395.
  25. SL... MECK.... N. J.. .t: FEVREISKI. J. (1983). The generation effect when generation fails. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 22. 153-163.
  26. SL... MECK.... N. J., .t: GUF, P. (1978). The generation effect: Delin- eation of a phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 4. 592-604.
  27. SL... MECK"', N. J.,.t: K"'Ts... rn, K. T. (1987). The generation effect as an artifact of selective displaced rehearsal. Journal of Memory & Lan- guage. 26. 589-607.
  28. W... TKlNS. M. J., .t SECHLER. E. S. (1988). Generation effect with an incidental memorization procedure. Journal of Memory & Language. 27. 537-544.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Begg, I., Vinski, E., Frankovich, L., & Holgate, B.
Affiliations
McMaster University (CA)
Venue
Memory & Cognition
Published
1991-09
Volume
19
Issue
5
Pages
487-497
ISSN
  • 0090-502X (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5946
OpenAlex
W2002160302
Cited by
88
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Memory & Cognition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
generation effect, word memorability, reading comprehension, word production, metamemory, phonological processing, mental imagery, memory encoding strategies
MeSH terms
Adult, Attention, Concept Formation, Female, Humans, Male, Paired-Associate Learning, Reading, Mental 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