Testing the dual-memory framework: individual differences in the magnitude of the retrieval practice effect and fluid intelligence.

Retrieving information from memory enhances long-term retention. In this manuscript, we describe the dual-memory framework, which makes interval-scale predictions of the magnitude of this retrieval practice effect. After outlining the framework, we use data from our laboratory-both at the group level and at the distribution level-to fit the equations from the dual-memory framework. Overall, we successfully fitted the model predictions to the observed average data. In addition, we compared the predicted and the observed distributions of performance in the retrieval practice condition. More importantly, we introduce a useful approach to simulate empirical scenarios and test the relationship between individual-difference variables and the retrieval practice effect. We illustrate the application of this approach using data from a study that measured fluid intelligence. Future studies may benefit from contrasting different strength-based frameworks.

Retrieval Practice in Memory- and Language-Impaired Populations: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: Neurological conditions, such as multiple sclerosis and stroke, may impair memory and language. A technique called retrieval practice (RP) may improve memory and language outcomes in such clinical populations. The RP effect refers to the finding that retrieving information from memory leads to better long-term retention than restudying the same information. Although the benefits of RP have been repeatedly observed in healthy populations, less is known about its potential applications in cognitive rehabilitation in clinical populations. Here we review the RP literature in populations with acquired memory and language impairments. METHOD: Systematic searches for studies published before January 2020 were conducted on Elsevier, PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO, Pubmed, Web of Science, and Wiley Online Library, with the terms "retrieval practice"/"testing effect" and "cognitive rehabilitation". In addition, backward and forward snowballing were used to allow the identification of important publications missed by the initial search. Studies were included if they were peer-reviewed, empirical work in which memory or language outcome measures were compared between an RP condition and a re-exposure-control condition in patients with acquired memory or language impairments. RESULTS: Sixteen articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Studies from memory-impaired samples were relatively homogeneous with respect to experimental protocols and materials and favored RP over control conditions. The results were mostly positive despite short retention intervals and predominantly single-session designs. Similarly, studies from language-impaired samples focused on naming impairments in patients with aphasia and also favored RP over name repetition. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that RP is a viable technique for cognitive rehabilitation.