When is guessing incorrectly better than studying for enhancing memory?
Open accessAbstract
Recently, Kornell, Hays, and Bjork (Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 35:989-998, 2009) demonstrated that incorrect guessing can benefit subsequent memory to a greater degree than can an equivalent amount of study time. We explored this intriguing finding to determine which factors moderate the advantage of incorrect guessing relative to study. In contrast to the findings of Kornell et al., our Experiment 1 revealed that incorrect guessing resulted in worse performance than did studying and that the number of incorrect guesses did not moderate the effect. In contrast, Experiment 2 revealed that the timing of subsequent study moderated the effectiveness of incorrect guessing over study. Final test performance was greater for incorrectly guessed items than for prestudied items when a subsequent study opportunity occurred immediately after the pretrial, whereas the pattern reversed when subsequent study was delayed. This crossover interaction emerged largely because prestudy items showed a classic spacing effect, whereas the guess items did not. One plausible explanation for the absence of a spacing benefit for guess items is that delaying the subsequent study trial increases source-monitoring errors during retrieval, such that participants confuse their original guess with the correctly studied target. However, Experiment 3 provided evidence against this source-monitoring account. We concluded by discussing other possible accounts of why the timing of study could moderate the effectiveness of incorrect guessing.
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?
A boundary condition for the benefit of guessing is that the correct answer has to be presented shortly after the guess.
“A boundary condition for the benefit of guessing to occur is that the correct answer has to be presented shortly after the guess (Vaughn & Rawson, 2012).”
From Predicting as a learning strategy (2021) · cites this paper as Vaughn & Rawson, 2012
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
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 · see citing works
The University of South Florida free association, rhyme, and word fragment norms
Nelson, D. L., McEvoy, C. L., & Schreiber, T. A. (2004) · Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers · doi:10.3758/bf03195588 · Cited by 1,961 · see citing works
Skinner, B. F. (1958) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.128.3330.969 · Cited by 777 · see citing works
Unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhance subsequent learning.
Kornell, N., Hays, M. J., & Bjork, R. A. (2009) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition · doi:10.1037/a0015729 · Cited by 484 · see citing works
Why Testing Improves Memory: Mediator Effectiveness Hypothesis
Pyc, M. A., & Rawson, K. A. (2010) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1191465 · Cited by 371 · see citing works
Self-citationAllocation of self-paced study time and the "labor-in-vain effect."
Nelson, T. O., & Leonesio, R. J. (1988) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition · doi:10.1037//0278-7393.14.4.676 · Cited by 332 · see citing works
The pretesting effect: do unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhance learning?
Richland, L. E., Kornell, N., & Kao, L. S. (2009) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied · doi:10.1037/a0016496 · Cited by 302 · see citing works
Application of the testing and spacing effects to name learning
Carpenter, S. K., & DeLosh, E. L. (2005) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.1101 · Cited by 270 · see citing works
Carpenter, S. K. (2011) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition · doi:10.1037/a0024140 · Cited by 259 · see citing works
Allocation of self-paced study time and the "labor-in-vain effect."
Nelson, T. O., & Leonesio, R. J. (1988) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition · doi:10.1037/0278-7393.14.4.676 · Cited by 216 · see citing works
The memorial consequences of multiple-choice testing
Marsh, E. J., Roediger, H. L., III, Bjork, R. A., & Bjork, E. L. (2007) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/bf03194051 · Cited by 161 · see citing works
Optimizing cue effectiveness: Recall of 500 and 600 incidentally learned words.
Maentylae, T. (1986) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition · doi:10.1037/0278-7393.12.1.66 · Cited by 137 · see citing works
The Contribution of Mediator-Based Deficiencies to Age Differences in Associative Learning.
Dunlosky, J. T., Hertzog, C. K., & Powell-Moman, A. (2005) · Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1037/0012-1649.41.2.389 · Cited by 126 · see citing works
Transfer of training as a function of experimental paradigm and degree of first-list learning
Postman, L. J. (1962) · Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(62)80007-3 · Cited by 108 · see citing works
When additional multiple-choice lures aid versus hinder later memory
Butler, A. C., Marsh, E. J., Goode, M. K., & Roediger, H. L., III (2006) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.1239 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Diagnosing Criterion-Level Effects on Memory
Vaughn, K. E., & Rawson, K. A. (2011) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797611417724 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
Self-citationCarpenter, S. K., Sachs, R. E., Martin, B., Schmidt, K., & Looft, R. (2011) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-011-0185-7 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Maintenance of prior associations and proactive inhibition.
Postman, L. J., & Gray, W. D. (1977) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Learning & Memory · doi:10.1037/0278-7393.3.3.255 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Maintenance of prior associations and proactive inhibition.
Postman, L. J., & Gray, W. D. (1977) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Learning & Memory · doi:10.1037//0278-7393.3.3.255 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Effects of prior guessing on intentional and incidental paired-associate learning
Berlyne, D. E., Carey, S. T., Lazare, S. A., Parlow, J., & Tiberius, R. (1968) · Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(68)80137-9 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Izawa, C., & Ohta, N. (2014) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781410612717-7 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Self-Regulated Learning: Beliefs, Techniques, and Illusions
Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143823 · Cited by 1,468 · see citing works
Generative Learning: Which Strategies for What Age?
Brod, G. (2021) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-020-09571-9 · Cited by 145 · see citing works
When generating a prediction boosts learning: The element of surprise
Brod, G., Hasselhorn, M., & Bunge, S. A. (2018) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.01.013 · Cited by 131 · see citing works
Towards a Theory of Learning for Naming Rehabilitation: Retrieval Practice and Spacing Effects
Middleton, E. L., Schwartz, M. F., Rawson, K. A., Traut, H., & Verkuilen, J. (2016) · Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research · doi:10.1044/2016_jslhr-l-15-0303 · Cited by 125 · see citing works
Self-citationKornell, N. (2014) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition · doi:10.1037/a0033699 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Multiple-choice pretesting potentiates learning of related information
Little, J. L., & Bjork, E. L. (2016) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/s13421-016-0621-z · Cited by 75 · see citing works
Pan, S. C., & Carpenter, S. K. (2023) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-023-09814-5 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Lighting the wick in the candle of learning: generating a prediction stimulates curiosity
Brod, G., & Breitwieser, J. (2019) · npj Science of Learning · doi:10.1038/s41539-019-0056-y · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Predicting as a learning strategy
Brod, G. (2021) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-021-01904-1 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Learning from your mistakes: does it matter if you’re out in left foot, I mean field?
Cyr, A.-A., & Anderson, N. D. (2018) · Memory · doi:10.1080/09658211.2018.1464189 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
- Authors
- Vaughn, K. E., & Rawson, K. A.
- Affiliations
- Kent State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Vaughn, Kalif E.
- Venue
- Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
- Published
- 2012-06-12
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 899-905
- ISSN
- 1069-9384 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-5320
- OpenAlex
- W2154584438
- Cited by
- 62
- References
- 21
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 1.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Psychonomic Bulletin & Review (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
- study time, memory enhancement, spacing effect, source monitoring
- MeSH terms
- Cues, Humans, Learning, Memory, Mental Recall, Time Factors, Test Taking Skills
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
