| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立中央大學 === 認知與神經科學研究所 === 107 === This study investigated the organizational processing in test-potentiated learning: why testing benefits retention by potentiating subsequent learning or encoding. To examine whether the test-potentiated learning effect comes from the organizational processing of the materials after test, the types of materials were manipulated among the experiments. Experiment 1 tested this hypothesis by employing unrelated words & randomly categorized words as the study materials. The results showed higher recall rates for the groups that received repeated testing before restudy than for other groups. However, the test-potentiated learning effect did not show the different degrees between unrelated words condition and categorized words condition. These results indicated that the participants might still involve organizational processing when learned randomly categorized words. The categorized words were presented by category in different colors in Experiment 2. However, the recall rates of the group who received repeated testing and repeated studying were still significantly better than other groups. Also, The Adjusted Ratio of Clustering scores of the two groups who have received repeated testing were significantly higher in the final test compare to the repeated test. The results indicated that participants will show stronger organization as long as they receive repeated testing. But stronger organization does not always lead to test-potentiated learning effect. Experiment 3 employed a similar procedure of Experiment 1 & 2, during which ERPs were recorded at the initial/final study. The prefrontal subsequent memory effect(SME) was only found in the final study phase after repeated testing, reflecting that deep processing may involve in the encoding. The frontal & parietal SME was found in both the initial & final study phase, but significant interaction between condition (received testing or not) and SME was only observed in the final study phase after repeated testing, revealing that repeated testing indeed affect subsequent learning. Also, additional semantic processing might be involve in subsequent encoding. In summary, our behavioral results replicated test-potentiated learning effect but do not support the hypothesis that testing potentiate subsequent learning comes from the organizational processing. Neural physiological results suggest that after repeated testing, additional deep processing might involve in subsequent encoding.
|
|---|
