Vocabulary Learning During Reading: Benefits of Contextual Inferences Versus Retrieval Opportunities.

Retrieval practice of isolated words (e.g., with flashcards) enhances foreign vocabulary learning. However, vocabulary is often encountered in context. We investigated whether retrieval opportunities also enhance contextualized word learning. In two within-subjects experiments, participants encoded 24 foreign words and then read a story to further strengthen word knowledge. The story contained eight target words in a retrieval context, which required participants to recall word meaning from memory to understand the text (e.g., "She borrowed a knyga"), and eight target words in an inference context from which meaning could be inferred (e.g., "She read a knyga" [book]). After 1 to 2 days, a posttest measured word retention. Reading the words in either the retrieval or inference context increased retention, compared to control words not included in the story. Moreover, in Experiment 1, retention was significantly higher in the inference than in the retrieval condition. In Experiment 2, in which encoding before reading was more extensive and feedback was available, no differences in retention were found between the inference and retrieval + feedback condition (both increased retention, compared to control words). Overall, the findings suggest that the benefits of retrieval may be less pronounced during incidental, contextualized learning than during intentional exercises and that retrieval success must be considered when adding retrieval opportunities to contextualized learning. Under low retrieval success, the better comprehension afforded by an informative context may outweigh the benefits of retrieval opportunities (Exp.1). Yet even when retrieval success was enhanced and feedback was added (Exp. 2), retrieval opportunities were only as beneficial as exposure to rich contextual information.

Effects of elaborate feedback during practice tests: Costs and benefits of retrieval prompts.

This study explores the effect of feedback with hints on students' recall of words. In three classroom experiments, high school students individually practiced vocabulary words through computerized retrieval practice with either standard show-answer feedback (display of answer) or hints feedback after incorrect responses. Hints feedback gave students a second chance to find the correct response using orthographic (Experiment 1), mnemonic (Experiment 2), or cross-language hints (Experiment 3). During practice, hints led to a shift of practice time from further repetitions to longer feedback processing but did not reduce (repeated) errors. There was no effect of feedback on later recall except when the hints from practice were also available on the test, indicating limited transfer of practice with hints to later recall without hints (in Experiments 1 and 2). Overall, hints feedback was not preferable over show-answer feedback. The common notion that hints are beneficial may not hold when the total practice time is limited. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Do testing effects change over time? Insights from immediate and delayed retrieval speed.

Retrieving information from memory improves recall accuracy more than continued studying, but this testing effect often only becomes visible over time. In contrast, the present study documents testing effects on recall speed both immediately after practice and after a delay. A total of 40 participants learned the translation of 100 Swahili words and then further restudied the words with translations or retrieved the translations from memory during testing. As in previous experiments, recall accuracy was higher for restudied words than for tested words immediately after practice, but higher for tested words after 7 days. Response times for correct answers, however, showed a different result: Learners were faster to recall tested words than restudied words both immediately after practice and after 7 days. These results are interpreted in light of recent suggestions that testing selectively strengthens cue-response associations. An additional outcome was that testing effects on recall accuracy were related to perceived retrieval success during practice. When several practice retrievals were successful, testing effects on recall accuracy were already significant immediately after practice. Together with the reaction time data, this supports recent models that attribute changes in testing effects over time to limited item retrievability during practice.

Neural correlates of testing effects in vocabulary learning.

Tests that require memory retrieval strongly improve long-term retention in comparison to continued studying. For example, once learners know the translation of a word, restudy practice, during which they see the word and its translation again, is less effective than testing practice, during which they see only the word and retrieve the translation from memory. In the present functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study, we investigated the neuro-cognitive mechanisms underlying this striking testing effect. Twenty-six young adults without prior knowledge of Swahili learned the translation of 100 Swahili words and then further practiced the words in an fMRI scanner by restudying or by testing. Recall of the translations on a final memory test after one week was significantly better and faster for tested words than for restudied words. Brain regions that were more active during testing than during restudying included the left inferior frontal gyrus, ventral striatum, and midbrain areas. Increased activity in the left inferior parietal and left middle temporal areas during testing but not during restudying predicted better recall on the final memory test. Together, results suggest that testing may be more beneficial than restudying due to processes related to targeted semantic elaboration and selective strengthening of associations between retrieval cues and relevant responses, and may involve increased effortful cognitive control and modulations of memory through striatal motivation and reward circuits.