Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > When further learning fails: stability and chan...
View graph of relations

When further learning fails: stability and change following repeated presentation of text.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

When further learning fails: stability and change following repeated presentation of text. / Fritz, Caroline O.; Morris, Peter E.; Bjork, Robert A.; Gelman, Rochel; Wickens, Thomas D.

In: British Journal of Psychology, Vol. 91, No. 4, 11.2000, p. 493-511.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Fritz, CO, Morris, PE, Bjork, RA, Gelman, R & Wickens, TD 2000, 'When further learning fails: stability and change following repeated presentation of text.', British Journal of Psychology, vol. 91, no. 4, pp. 493-511. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712600161952

APA

Vancouver

Author

Fritz, Caroline O. ; Morris, Peter E. ; Bjork, Robert A. ; Gelman, Rochel ; Wickens, Thomas D. / When further learning fails: stability and change following repeated presentation of text. In: British Journal of Psychology. 2000 ; Vol. 91, No. 4. pp. 493-511.

Bibtex

@article{1a8aa2741dc040809a2082a433b33187,
title = "When further learning fails: stability and change following repeated presentation of text.",
abstract = "Kay (1955) presented a text passage to participants on a weekly basis and found that most errors and omissions in recall persisted despite repeated re-presentation of the text. Experiment 1 replicated and extended Kay s original research, demonstrating that after a first recall attempt there was very little evidence of further learning, whether measured in terms of further acquisition or error correction, over three more presentations of the text passages. Varying the schedule of presentations and tests had little effect, although performance was better when intermediate trials included both presentation and test than when only presentations or tests occurred. Experiment 2 explored whether this 'failure of further learning' effect could be overcome by (a) warning participants against basing their recall on their previous recall efforts and specifically directing them to base their recall upon the passages, (b) making each presentation more distinctive, or (c) drawing participants' attention to areas that would benefit from further learning by requiring them to tally their omissions and errors. The effect persisted in all cases. The findings have serious implications for the learning of text material.",
author = "Fritz, {Caroline O.} and Morris, {Peter E.} and Bjork, {Robert A.} and Rochel Gelman and Wickens, {Thomas D.}",
year = "2000",
month = nov,
doi = "10.1348/000712600161952",
language = "English",
volume = "91",
pages = "493--511",
journal = "British Journal of Psychology",
issn = "0007-1269",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - When further learning fails: stability and change following repeated presentation of text.

AU - Fritz, Caroline O.

AU - Morris, Peter E.

AU - Bjork, Robert A.

AU - Gelman, Rochel

AU - Wickens, Thomas D.

PY - 2000/11

Y1 - 2000/11

N2 - Kay (1955) presented a text passage to participants on a weekly basis and found that most errors and omissions in recall persisted despite repeated re-presentation of the text. Experiment 1 replicated and extended Kay s original research, demonstrating that after a first recall attempt there was very little evidence of further learning, whether measured in terms of further acquisition or error correction, over three more presentations of the text passages. Varying the schedule of presentations and tests had little effect, although performance was better when intermediate trials included both presentation and test than when only presentations or tests occurred. Experiment 2 explored whether this 'failure of further learning' effect could be overcome by (a) warning participants against basing their recall on their previous recall efforts and specifically directing them to base their recall upon the passages, (b) making each presentation more distinctive, or (c) drawing participants' attention to areas that would benefit from further learning by requiring them to tally their omissions and errors. The effect persisted in all cases. The findings have serious implications for the learning of text material.

AB - Kay (1955) presented a text passage to participants on a weekly basis and found that most errors and omissions in recall persisted despite repeated re-presentation of the text. Experiment 1 replicated and extended Kay s original research, demonstrating that after a first recall attempt there was very little evidence of further learning, whether measured in terms of further acquisition or error correction, over three more presentations of the text passages. Varying the schedule of presentations and tests had little effect, although performance was better when intermediate trials included both presentation and test than when only presentations or tests occurred. Experiment 2 explored whether this 'failure of further learning' effect could be overcome by (a) warning participants against basing their recall on their previous recall efforts and specifically directing them to base their recall upon the passages, (b) making each presentation more distinctive, or (c) drawing participants' attention to areas that would benefit from further learning by requiring them to tally their omissions and errors. The effect persisted in all cases. The findings have serious implications for the learning of text material.

U2 - 10.1348/000712600161952

DO - 10.1348/000712600161952

M3 - Journal article

VL - 91

SP - 493

EP - 511

JO - British Journal of Psychology

JF - British Journal of Psychology

SN - 0007-1269

IS - 4

ER -