The tainted altruism effect: a successful pre-registered replication.

Newman and Cain (Newman, Cain 2014 Psychol. Sci. 25, 648-655 (doi:10.1177/0956797613504785)) reported that observers view a person's choices as less ethical when that person has acted in response to both altruistic and selfish (commercial) motivations, as compared with purely selfish interests. The altruistic component reduces the observers' approval rather than raising it. This puzzling phenomenon termed the 'tainted altruism' effect, has attracted considerable interest but no direct replications in prior research. We report direct replications of Newman and Cain's Experiments 2 and 3, using a larger sample (n = 501) intended to be fairly representative of the US population. The results confirm the original findings in considerable detail.

Mitigating cue competition effects in human category learning.

When people learn perceptual categories, if one feature makes it easy to determine the category membership, learning about other features can be reduced. In three experiments, we asked whether this cue competition effect could be fully eradicated with simple instructions. For this purpose, in a pilot experiment, we adapted a classical overshadowing paradigm into a human category learning task. Unlike previous reports, we demonstrate a robust cue competition effect with human learners. In Experiments 1 and 2, we created a new warning condition that aimed at eradicating the cue competition effect through top-down instructions. With a medium-size overshadowing effect, Experiment 1 shows a weak mitigation of the overshadowing effect. We replaced the stimuli in Experiment 2 to obtain a larger overshadowing effect and showed a larger warning effect. Nevertheless, the overshadowing effect could not be fully eradicated. These experiments suggest that cue competition effects can be a stubborn roadblock in human category learning. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Author Correction: A consensus-based transparency checklist.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.

Perceptions of newsworthiness are contaminated by a political usefulness bias.

Are people's perceptions of the newsworthiness of events biased by a tendency to rate as more important any news story that seems likely to lead others to share their own political attitudes? To assess this, we created six pairs of hypothetical news stories, each describing an event that seemed likely to encourage people to adopt attitudes on the opposite side of a particular controversial issue (e.g. affirmative action and gay marriage). In total, 569 subjects were asked to evaluate the importance of these stories 'to the readership of a general-circulation newspaper', disregarding how interesting they happened to find the event. Subjects later indicated their own personal attitudes to the underlying political issues. Predicted crossover interactions were confirmed for all six issues. All the interactions took the form of subjects rating stories offering 'ammunition' for their own side of the controversial issue as possessing greater intrinsic news importance.

How effective is incidental learning of the shape of probability distributions?

The idea that people learn detailed probabilistic generative models of the environments they interact with is intuitively appealing, and has received support from recent studies of implicit knowledge acquired in daily life. The goal of this study was to see whether people efficiently induce a probability distribution based upon incidental exposure to an unknown generative process. Subjects played a 'whack-a-mole' game in which they attempted to click on objects appearing briefly, one at a time on the screen. Horizontal positions of the objects were generated from a bimodal distribution. After 180 plays of the game, subjects were unexpectedly asked to generate another 180 target positions of their own from the same distribution. Their responses did not even show a bimodal distribution, much less an accurate one (Experiment 1). The same was true for a pre-announced test (Experiment 2). On the other hand, a more extreme bimodality with zero density in a middle region did produce some distributional learning (Experiment 3), perhaps reflecting conscious hypothesis testing. We discuss the challenge this poses to the idea of efficient accurate distributional learning.

Learning to exploit a hidden predictor in skill acquisition: Tight linkage to conscious awareness.

It is often assumed that implicit learning of skills based on predictive relationships proceeds independently of awareness. To test this idea, four groups of subjects played a game in which a fast-moving "demon" made a brief appearance at the bottom of the computer screen, then disappeared behind a V-shaped occluder, and finally re-appeared briefly on either the upper-left or upper-right quadrant of the screen. Points were scored by clicking on the demon during the final reappearance phase. Demons differed in several visible characteristics including color, horn height and eye size. For some subjects, horn height perfectly predicted which side the demon would reappear on. For subjects not told the rule, the subset who demonstrated at the end of the experiment that they had spontaneously discovered the rule showed strong evidence of exploiting it by anticipating the demon's arrival and laying in wait for it. Those who could not verbalize the rule performed no better than a control group for whom the demons moved unpredictably. The implications of this tight linkage between conscious awareness and implicit skill learning are discussed.

Fragile associations coexist with robust memories for precise details in long-term memory.

What happens to memories as we forget? They might gradually lose fidelity, lose their associations (and thus be retrieved in response to the incorrect cues), or be completely lost. Typical long-term memory studies assess memory as a binary outcome (correct/incorrect), and cannot distinguish these different kinds of forgetting. Here we assess long-term memory for scalar information, thus allowing us to quantify how different sources of error diminish as we learn, and accumulate as we forget. We trained subjects on visual and verbal continuous quantities (the locations of objects and the distances between major cities, respectively), tested subjects after extended delays, and estimated whether recall errors arose due to imprecise estimates, misassociations, or complete forgetting. Although subjects quickly formed precise memories and retained them for a long time, they were slow to learn correct associations and quick to forget them. These results suggest that long-term recall is especially limited in its ability to form and retain associations.

With practice, keyboard shortcuts become faster than menu selection: A crossover interaction.

It is widely believed that a graphical user interface (GUI) is superior to a command line interface (CLI) for novice users, but less efficient than the CLI after practice. However, there appears to be no detailed study of the crossover interaction that this implies. The rate of learning may shed light on the reluctance of experienced users to adopt keyboard shortcuts, even though, when mastered, shortcut use would reduce task completion times. We report 2 experiments examining changes in the efficiency of and preference for keyboard input versus GUI with practice. Experiment 1 had separate groups of subjects make speeded choice responses to words on a 20-item list either by clicking on a tab in a dropdown menu (GUI version) or by entering a preassigned keystroke combination (CLI version). The predicted crossover was observed after approximately 200 responses. Experiment 2 showed that following training all but 1 subject in the CLI-trained group chose to continue using shortcuts. These results suggest that frequency of shortcut use is a function of ease of retrieval, which develops over the course of multiple repetitions of the command. We discuss possible methods for promoting shortcut learning and the practical implications of our results.

Do subtle reminders of money change people's political views?

A number of researchers have reported studies showing that subtle reminders of money can alter behaviors and beliefs that are seemingly unrelated to money. In 1 set of studies published in this journal, Caruso, Vohs, Baxter, and Waytz (2013) found that incidental exposures to money led subjects to indicate greater support for inequality, socioeconomic differences, group-based discrimination, and free market economies. We conducted high-powered replication attempts of these 4 money priming effects and found no evidence of priming (weighted Cohen's d = 0.03). We later learned that Caruso et al. also found several null effects in their line of research that were not reported in the original article. In addition, the money priming effect observed in the first study of Caruso et al. was included in the Many Labs Replication Project (Klein et al., 2014), and only 1 of the 36 labs was able to find the effect.

Retrieval practice: the lack of transfer to deductive inferences.

Retrieval practice has been shown to enhance later recall of information reviewed through testing, whereas final-test measures involving making inferences from the learned information have produced mixed results. In four experiments, we examined whether the benefits of retrieval practice could transfer to deductive inferences. Participants studied a set of related premises and then reviewed these premises either by rereading or by taking fill-in-the-blank tests. As was expected, the testing condition produced better final-test recall of the premises. However, performance on multiple-choice inference questions showed no enhancement from retrieval practice.

Elastic analysis procedures: an incurable (but preventable) problem in the fertility effect literature. Comment on Gildersleeve, Haselton, and Fales (2014).

Gildersleeve, Haselton, and Fales (2014) presented a meta-analysis of the effects of fertility on mate preferences in women. Research in this area has categorized fertility using a great variety of methods, chiefly based on self-reported cycle length and time since last menses. We argue that this literature is particularly prone to hidden experimenter degrees of freedom. Studies vary greatly in the duration and timing of windows used to define fertile versus nonfertile phases, criteria for excluding subjects, and the choice of what moderator variables to include, as well as other variables. These issues raise the concern that many or perhaps all results may have been created by exploitation of unacknowledged degrees of freedom ("p-hacking"). Gildersleeve et al. sought to dismiss such concerns, but we contend that their arguments rest upon statistical and logical errors. The possibility that positive results in this literature may have been created, or at least greatly amplified, by p-hacking receives additional support from the fact that recent attempts at exact replication of fertility results have mostly failed. Our concerns are also supported by findings of another recent review of the literature (Wood, Kressel, Joshi, & Louie, 2014). We conclude on a positive note, arguing that if fertility-effect researchers take advantage of the rapidly emerging opportunities for study preregistration, the validity of this literature can be rapidly clarified.

Retrieval practice over the long term: should spacing be expanding or equal-interval?

If multiple opportunities are available to review to-be-learned material, should a review occur soon after initial study and recur at progressively expanding intervals, or should the reviews occur at equal intervals? Landauer and Bjork (1978) argued for the superiority of expanding intervals, whereas more recent research has often failed to find any advantage. However, these prior studies have generally compared expanding versus equal-interval training within a single session, and have assessed effects only upon a single final test. We argue that a more generally important goal would be to maintain high average performance over a considerable period of training. For the learning of foreign vocabulary spread over four weeks, we found that expanding retrieval practice (i.e., sessions separated by increasing numbers of days) produced recall equivalent to that from equal-interval practice on a final test given eight weeks after training. However, the expanding schedule yielded much higher average recallability over the whole training period.

Improving students' long-term knowledge retention through personalized review.

Human memory is imperfect; thus, periodic review is required for the long-term preservation of knowledge and skills. However, students at every educational level are challenged by an ever-growing amount of material to review and an ongoing imperative to master new material. We developed a method for efficient, systematic, personalized review that combines statistical techniques for inferring individual differences with a psychological theory of memory. The method was integrated into a semester-long middle-school foreign-language course via retrieval-practice software. Using a cumulative exam administered after the semester's end, we compared time-matched review strategies and found that personalized review yielded a 16.5% boost in course retention over current educational practice (massed study) and a 10.0% improvement over a one-size-fits-all strategy for spaced study.

The specificity of learned parallelism in dual-memory retrieval.

Retrieval of two responses from one visually presented cue occurs sequentially at the outset of dual-retrieval practice. Exclusively for subjects who adopt a mode of grouping (i.e., synchronizing) their response execution, however, reaction times after dual-retrieval practice indicate a shift to learned retrieval parallelism (e.g., Nino & Rickard, in Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 373-388, 2003). In the present study, we investigated how this learned parallelism is achieved and why it appears to occur only for subjects who group their responses. Two main accounts were considered: a task-level versus a cue-level account. The task-level account assumes that learned retrieval parallelism occurs at the level of the task as a whole and is not limited to practiced cues. Grouping response execution may thus promote a general shift to parallel retrieval following practice. The cue-level account states that learned retrieval parallelism is specific to practiced cues. This type of parallelism may result from cue-specific response chunking that occurs uniquely as a consequence of grouped response execution. The results of two experiments favored the second account and were best interpreted in terms of a structural bottleneck model.

Two failures to replicate high-performance-goal priming effects.

Bargh et al. (2001) reported two experiments in which people were exposed to words related to achievement (e.g., strive, attain) or to neutral words, and then performed a demanding cognitive task. Performance on the task was enhanced after exposure to the achievement related words. Bargh and colleagues concluded that better performance was due to the achievement words having activated a "high-performance goal". Because the paper has been cited well over 1100 times, an attempt to replicate its findings would seem warranted. Two direct replication attempts were performed. Results from the first experiment (n = 98) found no effect of priming, and the means were in the opposite direction from those reported by Bargh and colleagues. The second experiment followed up on the observation by Bargh et al. (2001) that high-performance-goal priming was enhanced by a 5-minute delay between priming and test. Adding such a delay, we still found no evidence for high-performance-goal priming (n = 66). These failures to replicate, along with other recent results, suggest that the literature on goal priming requires some skeptical scrutiny.

Reviewing erroneous information facilitates memory updating.

Reviewing information stored in memory will generally strengthen that information, so it seems reasonable that reviews should make it harder to replace the information in memory if it is later found to be erroneous. In Experiment 1, subjects learned three facts about each of 12 topics. On Day 2, the same facts were either reread, tested, or not reviewed; then the facts were "corrected" with new replacement facts. A test on the replacement facts given 1week later disclosed that both rereading and testing the to-be-replaced Day-1 facts enhanced memory for the Day-2 facts which supplanted them, although rereading (but not testing) the Day-1 facts also led to more intrusions of Day-1 facts on the final test. In Experiment 2, subjects were unexpectedly asked (in the final test) to recollect both original and replacement facts; old facts were often retrieved, especially when reviewed. It is suggested that review may promote development of a secondary retrieval route for the corrected information.

Divided attention: an undesirable difficulty in memory retention.

How can we improve memory retention? A large body of research has suggested that difficulty encountered during learning, such as when practice sessions are distributed rather than massed, can enhance later memory performance (see R. A. Bjork & E. L. Bjork, 1992). Here, we investigated whether divided attention during retrieval practice can also constitute a desirable difficulty. Following two initial study phases and one test phase with Swahili-English word pairs (e.g., vuvi-snake), we manipulated whether items were tested again under full or divided attention. Two days later, participants were brought back for a final cued-recall test (e.g., vuvi-?). Across three experiments (combined N = 122), we found no evidence that dividing attention while practicing retrieval enhances memory retention. This finding raises the question of why many types of difficulty during practice do improve long-term retention, but dividing attention does not.

Don't just repeat after me: retrieval practice is better than imitation for foreign vocabulary learning.

Second language (L2) instruction programs often ask learners to repeat aloud words spoken by a native speaker. However, recent research on retrieval practice has suggested that imitating native pronunciation might be less effective than drill instruction, wherein the learner is required to produce the L2 words from memory (and given feedback). We contrasted the effectiveness of imitation and retrieval practice drills on learning L2 spoken vocabulary. Learners viewed pictures of objects and heard their names; in the imitation condition, they heard and then repeated aloud each name, whereas in the retrieval practice condition, they tried to produce the name before hearing it. On a final test administered either immediately after training (Exp. 1) or after a 2-day delay (Exp. 2), retrieval practice produced better comprehension of the L2 words, better ability to produce the L2 words, and no loss of pronunciation quality.

Effects of spaced versus massed training in function learning.

A robust finding in the literature is that spacing material leads to better retention than massing; however, the benefit of spacing for concept learning is less clear. When items are massed, it may help the learner to discover the relationship between instances, leading to better abstraction of the underlying concept. Two experiments addressed this question through a typical function learning task in which subjects were trained via presentations of input points (cue values) for which output responses (criterion values) were required. Subjects were trained either using spaced points, strategically massed points (points were paired in training such that they occurred on the same side of the underlying V-shaped function), or randomly massed points (points were randomly paired during training). All subjects were then tested on repeated training points, new (interpolation) points within the training range, and extrapolation points that fell outside the training range. Spacing led to superior interpolation and extrapolation performance, with random massing leading to the worst performance on all test trial types. These results suggest that, at least for function concepts, massed training is not superior to spaced training for concept learning.