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 Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

After studying a stimulus (e.g., a word triplet such as gift, rose, wine), taking a cued recall test on that stimulus (e.g., gift, rose, ?) improves later recall of the retrieved term (e.g., wine) relative to a restudy control. That testing effect, however, is specific to the tested term: later recall of a previously untested term from the same stimulus (e.g., gift or rose) is not enhanced. In the present research, two possibilities for that highly specific learning were investigated: (a) learning through cued recall is always highly specific to the tested term, or, alternatively, (b) learning specificity is unique to the case of retrieving a term from an episodic memory of a study event. We addressed those possibilities by using the pretesting paradigm, in which there is no study opportunity prior to cued recall testing, and hence retrieval occurs through semantic memory. The results of two experiments supported the latter hypothesis. Thus, it is not the recall attempt per se that produces highly specific learning, but rather the attempt to recall the response by accessing an episodic memory of a particular study event. Theoretical and practical implications for learning through cued recall are discussed.

Conditions of highly specific learning through cued recall