Reply to Sana et al.'s (2022) Commentary on Rest-from-Deliberate-Learning as a Mechanism for the Spacing Effect.
Saved in:
| Title: | Reply to Sana et al.'s (2022) Commentary on Rest-from-Deliberate-Learning as a Mechanism for the Spacing Effect. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Chen, Ouhao (AUTHOR), Paas, Fred (AUTHOR), Sweller, John (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Educational Psychology Review. Sep2022, Vol. 34 Issue 3, p1851-1858. 8p. |
| Subjects: | Short-term memory, Educational psychology |
| Abstract: | Sana and colleagues (2022) have raised a number of challenges regarding the operationalisation of constructs and selection of articles to Chen et al.'s (Educational Psychology Review 33:1499–1522, 2021) suggestion that resting from cognitive activity could possibly allow for working memory recovery and so explain some of the data on the spacing effect. In our response, we indicate that the goal of our proposed framework was to try to resolve some mixed results of the spacing and interleaving effects and offer an alternative explanation for those mixed results, rather than proposing a theory of everything. We acknowledge that there are other important factors, which does not however, provide grounds for rejecting our hypothesis. Additional empirical studies are needed to determine whether rest and its effect on working memory are important when analysing the spacing effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Educational Psychology Review is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Sana and colleagues (2022) have raised a number of challenges regarding the operationalisation of constructs and selection of articles to Chen et al.'s (Educational Psychology Review 33:1499–1522, 2021) suggestion that resting from cognitive activity could possibly allow for working memory recovery and so explain some of the data on the spacing effect. In our response, we indicate that the goal of our proposed framework was to try to resolve some mixed results of the spacing and interleaving effects and offer an alternative explanation for those mixed results, rather than proposing a theory of everything. We acknowledge that there are other important factors, which does not however, provide grounds for rejecting our hypothesis. Additional empirical studies are needed to determine whether rest and its effect on working memory are important when analysing the spacing effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1040726X |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s10648-022-09678-1 |
