Department of Psychology, Kent State University, P.O. Box 5190, Kent, OH 44242-0001, USA.
Psychon Bull Rev. 2012 Oct;19(5):899-905. doi: 10.3758/s13423-012-0276-0.
Recently, Kornell, Hays, and Bjork (Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 35:989-998, 2009) demonstrated that incorrect guessing can benefit subsequent memory to a greater degree than can an equivalent amount of study time. We explored this intriguing finding to determine which factors moderate the advantage of incorrect guessing relative to study. In contrast to the findings of Kornell et al., our Experiment 1 revealed that incorrect guessing resulted in worse performance than did studying and that the number of incorrect guesses did not moderate the effect. In contrast, Experiment 2 revealed that the timing of subsequent study moderated the effectiveness of incorrect guessing over study. Final test performance was greater for incorrectly guessed items than for prestudied items when a subsequent study opportunity occurred immediately after the pretrial, whereas the pattern reversed when subsequent study was delayed. This crossover interaction emerged largely because prestudy items showed a classic spacing effect, whereas the guess items did not. One plausible explanation for the absence of a spacing benefit for guess items is that delaying the subsequent study trial increases source-monitoring errors during retrieval, such that participants confuse their original guess with the correctly studied target. However, Experiment 3 provided evidence against this source-monitoring account. We concluded by discussing other possible accounts of why the timing of study could moderate the effectiveness of incorrect guessing.
最近，Kornell、Hays 和 Bjork（《实验心理学杂志：学习、记忆与认知》35：989-998，2009）证明，错误猜测比对等数量的学习时间更能有效地提高后续记忆。我们探讨了这一有趣的发现，以确定哪些因素可以调节错误猜测相对于学习的优势。与 Kornell 等人的研究结果相反，我们的实验 1 表明，错误猜测导致的表现比学习更差，而且错误猜测的次数并不能调节这种效果。相比之下，实验 2 表明，后续学习的时机调节了错误猜测相对于学习的有效性。当后续学习机会紧随预试之后出现时，错误猜测的项目的最终测试表现优于预先学习的项目，而当后续学习延迟时，情况则相反。这种交叉相互作用主要是因为预先学习的项目表现出了经典的间隔效应，而猜测的项目则没有。对于猜测项目没有间隔效应的一个合理解释是，延迟后续的学习试验会在检索过程中增加源监测错误，从而使参与者混淆他们最初的猜测和正确学习的目标。然而，实验 3 提供了反对这种源监测解释的证据。我们通过讨论研究时机为什么可以调节错误猜测的有效性的其他可能解释来结束讨论。
