An experiment was performed to investigate the effects of practice and spacing on retention of Japanese–English vocabulary paired associates. The relative benefit of spacing increased with increased practice and with longer retention intervals. Data were fitted with an activation‐based memory model, which proposes that each time an item is practiced it receives an increment of strength but that these increments decay as a power function of time. The rate of decay for each presentation depended on the activation at the time (...) of the presentation. This mechanism limits long‐term benefits from further practice at higher levels of activation and produces the spacing effect and its observed interactions with practice and retention interval. The model was compared with another model of the spacing effect (Raaijmakers, 2003) and was fit to some results from the literature on spacing and memory. (shrink)

Spacing between study trials of an item increases the probability that item will be recalled. This article presents a new model for spacing based on the SAM theory of memory developed by Raaijmakers and Shiffrin (1980, 1981). The model is a generalization of the SAM model as applied to interference paradigms (Mensink & Raaijmakers, 1988, 1989) and may be viewed as a mathematical version of the Component‐Levels theory proposed by Glenberg (1979). It is assumed that on a second presentation of (...) an item, information is added to an existing trace if the episodic memory image corresponding to that item is retrieved. If it is not retrieved, a new image is stored. It is shown that the model predicts many standard findings including the lack of a spacing effect for the recall of at least one of two items each presented once (Ross & Landauer, 1978). (shrink)

We examined whether variations in contextual diversity, spacing, and retrieval practice influenced how well adults learned new words from reading experience. Eye movements were recorded as adults read novel words embedded in sentences. In the learning phase, unfamiliar words were presented either in the same sentence repeated four times (same context) or in four different sentences (diverse context). Spacing was manipulated by presenting the sentences under distributed or non‐distributed practice. After learning, half of the participants were asked to retrieve the (...) new words, and half had an extra exposure to the new words. Although words experienced in diverse contexts were acquired more slowly during learning, they enjoyed a greater benefit of learning at immediate posttest. Distributed practice also slowed learning, but no benefit was observed at posttest. Although participants who had an extra exposure showed the greatest learning benefit overall, learning also benefited from retrieval opportunity, when words were experienced in diverse contexts. These findings demonstrate that variation in the content and structure of the learning environment impacts on word learning via reading. (shrink)