바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
사전등록 바로가기
 

logo

  • P-ISSN1226-9654
  • E-ISSN2733-466X
  • KCI

ISSN : 1226-9654

논문 상세

이전 다음
논문 투고

Vol.28 No.2

Citation Share

기억재료의 난이도와 연관성에 따른 틀린 인출의 기억촉진효과

Memory Enhancement Effect of Unsuccessful Retrieval according to Relatedness and Difficulty of Memory Materials

한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물 / The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, (P)1226-9654; (E)2733-466X
2016, v.28 no.2, pp.367-379
https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2016.28.2.009
이영창 (충남대학교)
방혜영 (충남대학교 심리학과)
곽진선 (충남대학교 심리학과)
민윤기 (충남대학교)
이영창, 방혜영, 곽진선, & 민윤기. (2016). 기억재료의 난이도와 연관성에 따른 틀린 인출의 기억촉진효과. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 28(2), 367-379, https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2016.28.2.009

초록

본 연구는 단어 쌍 자극을 사용하여 기억재료의 양적인 특성인 난이도(음절 수)와 질적인 특성인 연관성(의미적 관계성)이 틀린 인출의 기억촉진효과에 미치는 영향을 살펴보았다. 이를 위해 사용빈도가 유사한 단어들을 이용하여 고난이도-고연관 자극, 고난이도-저연관 자극, 저난이도 고연관 자극, 그리고 저난이도-저연관 자극으로 구분하고 틀린 인출시도를 통한 학습을 수행한 후 정확회상률을 측정하였다. 실험은 난이도(2)와 연관성(2)에 따른 집단 간 설계로 수행되었으며, 집단 간 이원변량분석을 실시하였다. 그 결과, 즉시회상과 지연회상 모두 난이도와 연관성의 주효과가 유의미한 것으로 나타났다. 세부적으로 고난이도 집단에 비해 저난이도 집단의 정확회상률이 우수했으며, 저연관 집단에 비해 고연관 집단의 정확회상률이 우수한 것으로 나타났다. 또한 즉시회상과 지연회상 모두 난이도와 연관성에 따른 정확회상률의 변화경향성이 유사한 것으로 나타났다. 이는 기억재료의 양적인 특성(난이도)과 질적인 특성(연관성)이 모두 틀린 인출의 기억촉진효과에 영향을 미치며, 일정시간이 지연된 후에도 유지된다는 것을 의미한다.

keywords
Unsuccessful Retrieval, Memory Enhancement Effect, Recollection Rates, 틀린 인출, 기억촉진효과, 회상률

Abstract

This study is conducted to confirm the influence of quantitative and qualitative characteristics, difficulty and relatedness between memory materials, on memory enhancement effect of unsuccessful retrieval. For this purpose, memory materials, the word pairs, are classified into four categories according to difficulty(2) and relatedness(2). The words of pairs have similar frequency of use. Then, participants learned the materials attempting unsuccessful retrieval and the results are measured as Recollection rates. The experiment is designed as between participants for difficulty(2) and relatedness(2), so two-way ANOVA between groups is performed. As a result, main effects of difficulty and relatedness are significant in both immediate and delayed recall test. Specifically, recollection rates of low difficulty group are better than high group and the rates of high relatedness group are better than low group. In addition, aspects of the rates for difficulty and relatedness are similar both in the immediate and delayed test. It means both quantitative and qualitative characteristics of memory materials, difficulty and relatedness, influence on memory enhancement effect of unsuccessful retrieval, even in delayed test condition.

keywords
Unsuccessful Retrieval, Memory Enhancement Effect, Recollection Rates, 틀린 인출, 기억촉진효과, 회상률

참고문헌

1.

국립국어연구원 (2003). 한국어 학습용 어휘목록 [On-line], Available: http://www.korean.go.kr/front/etcData/etcDataView.do?mn_id=46&etc_seq=71&pageIndex=1

2.

Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 2, 89-195.

3.

Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. (1974). Working memory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 8, 47-89.

4.

Browne, B. A., & Cruse, D. F. (1988). The incubation effect: Illusion or illumination? Human Performance, 1(3), 177-185.

5.

Cattell, J. M. (1886). The time it takes to see and name objects. Mind, 11(41), 63-65.

6.

Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82(6), 407-428.

7.

Cuddy, L. J., & Jacoby, L. L. (1982). When forgetting helps memory: An analysis of repetition effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21(4), 451-467.

8.

Diekelmann, S., & Born, J. (2010). The memory function of sleep. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11(2), 114-126.

9.

Ebbinghaus, H. (1885). Über das gedächtnis:untersuchungen zur experimentellen psychologie. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

10.

Glover, J. A. (1989). The “testing” phenomenon:Not gone but nearly forgotten. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 392.

11.

Grimaldi, P. J., & Karpicke, J. D. (2012). When and why do retrieval attempts enhance subsequent encoding? Memory & Cognition, 40(4), 505-513.

12.

Hintzman, D. L. (1984). MINERVA 2: A simulation model of human memory. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 16(2), 96-101.

13.

Huelser, B. J., & Metcalfe, J. (2012). Making related errors facilitates learning, but learners do not know it. Memory & Cognition, 40(4), 514-527.

14.

Jacoby, L. L. (1978). On interpreting the effects of repetition: Solving a problem versus remembering a solution. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17(6), 649-667.

15.

Kane, J. H., & Anderson, R. C. (1978). Depth of processing and interference effects in the learning and remembering of sentences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 626-635.

16.

Karpicke, J. D., & Grimaldi, P. J. (2012). Retrieval-based learning: A perspective for enhancing meaningful learning. Educational Psychology Review, 24(3), 401-418.

17.

Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). The critical importance of retrieval for learning. Science, 319(5865), 966-968.

18.

Kornell, N. (2014). Attempting to answer a meaningful question enhances subsequent learning even when feedback is delayed. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40(1), 106.

19.

Kornell, N., Hays, M. J., & Bjork, R. A. (2009). Unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhance subsequent learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(4), 989.

20.

Kornell, N., Klein, P. J., & Rawson, K. A. (2015). Retrieval attempts enhance learning, but retrieval success (versus failure) does not matter. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(1), 283.

21.

Legge, E. L., Madan, C. R., Ng, E. T., & Caplan, J. B. (2012). Building a memory palace in minutes: Equivalent memory performance using virtual versus conventional environments with the Method of Loci. Acta Psychologica, 141(3), 380-390.

22.

Miller, G. (2012). How Are Memories Retrieved? Science, 338(6103), 30-31.

23.

Potts, R., & Shanks, D. R. (2014). The benefit of generating errors during learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(2), 644.

24.

Pressley, M., Tanenbaum, R., McDaniel, M. A., & Wood, E. (1990). What happens when university students try to answer prequestions that accompany textbook material? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 15, 27-35.

25.

Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). Test-enhanced learning taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17(3), 249-255.

26.

Runquist, W. N. (1986). The effect of testing on the forgetting of related and unrelated associates. Canadian Journal of Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie, 40(1), 65.

27.

Seay, S. S., & McAlum, H. G. (2010). The use/application of mnemonics as a pedagogical tool in auditing. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 14(2), 33-47.

28.

Slamecka, N. J., & Fevreiski, J. (1983). The generation effect when generation fails. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 153-163.

29.

Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18(6), 643.

30.

Woollett, K., & Maguire, E. A. (2011). Acquiring “the Knowledge” of London's layout drives structural brain changes. Current Biology, 21(24), 2109-2114.

한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물

논문 투고 OA 정책