English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In three experiments, subjects learned two lists under incidental conditions and were then given either a part-word or a word (extralist associate) cue. Each cue was related to one word in each list. Half the subjects were given production instructions (an indirect memory test), and half were given cued recall instructions (a direct memory test). When the interval between List 2 and the test was shortened, recency effects were found for part-word cues for both cued recall and production instructions. Little or no recency effects were found with word cues. These results are incompatible with a simple distinction between the types of memory trace or information that are tapped by direct as opposed to indirect memory tasks. Possible causes for the recency effect and for the difference between word and part-word cues are discussed.

Recency effects in direct and indirect memory tasks