Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, P.O. Box 15915, 1001, Amsterdam, NK, Netherlands.
CBS - Statistics Netherlands, Department of Consumer Prices, P.O. Box 24500, 2490, The Hague, HA, Netherlands.
Psychon Bull Rev. 2023 Feb;30(1):303-307. doi: 10.3758/s13423-022-02172-3. Epub 2022 Sep 7.
This paper analyzes the savings measures introduced by Ebbinghaus in his monograph of 1885. He measured memory retention in terms of the learning time saved in subsequent study trials relative to the time spent on the first learning trial. We prove mathematically that Ebbinghaus' savings measure is independent of initial encoding strength, learning time, and relearning times. This theoretical model-free result demonstrates that savings is in a sense a very 'pure' measure of memory. Considering savings as an old-fashioned and unwieldy measure of memory may be unwarranted given this interesting property, which hitherto seems to have been overlooked. We contrast this with often used forgetting functions based on recall probability, such as the power function, showing that we should expect a lower forgetting rate in the initial portion of the curve for material that has been learned less well.
本文分析了艾宾浩斯在他 1885 年的专着中提出的节省措施。他根据后续学习试验相对于第一次学习试验所花费的学习时间,以节省的记忆保留量来衡量。我们从数学上证明了艾宾浩斯的节省措施与初始编码强度、学习时间和再学习时间无关。这一无需理论模型的结果表明,节省在某种意义上是一种非常“纯粹”的记忆衡量标准。考虑到节省作为记忆的一种老式和不便的衡量标准,鉴于这一有趣的特性,这种观点可能是没有根据的,而这一点似乎迄今为止一直被忽视。我们将这一点与基于召回概率的常用遗忘函数(如幂函数)进行了对比,结果表明,对于学习效果较差的材料,我们应该预期在曲线的初始部分会有较低的遗忘率。