Gaze, Eric C.
2023, besucht am: 08.05.2023.
Links | BibTeX | Schlagwörter: A, Dunn, Dunning-Kruger effect, hubris, humility, logic, mathmatics, psychology, thinking
@online{Gaze2023,
title = {Debunking the Dunning-Kruger effect – the least skilled people know how much they don’t know, but everyone thinks they are better than average},
author = {Eric C. Gaze},
url = {https://theconversation.com/debunking-the-dunning-kruger-effect-the-least-skilled-people-know-how-much-they-dont-know-but-everyone-thinks-they-are-better-than-average-195527},
year = {2023},
date = {2023-05-08},
urldate = {2023-05-08},
howpublished = {The Conversation},
keywords = {A, Dunn, Dunning-Kruger effect, hubris, humility, logic, mathmatics, psychology, thinking},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {online}
}
MacLeod, Sydney; Reynolds, Michael G.; Lehmann, Hugo
The mitigating effect of repeated memory reactivations on forgetting Artikel
In: npj Science of Learning, Bd. 9, Nr. 3, 2018, ISSN: 2056-7936.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Schlagwörter: A, memory, psychology, recall, remember, repetition
@article{MacLeod2018,
title = {The mitigating effect of repeated memory reactivations on forgetting},
author = {Sydney MacLeod and Michael G. Reynolds and Hugo Lehmann},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-018-0025-x},
doi = {10.1038/s41539-018-0025-x},
issn = {2056-7936},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-04-24},
urldate = {2018-06-12},
journal = {npj Science of Learning},
volume = {9},
number = {3},
abstract = {Memory reactivation is a process whereby cueing or recalling a long-term memory makes it enter a new active and labile state. Substantial evidence suggests that during this state the memory can be updated (e.g., adding information) and can become more vulnerable to disruption (e.g., brain insult). Memory reactivations can also prevent memory decay or forgetting. However, it is unclear whether cueing recall of a feature or component of the memory can benefit retention similarly to promoting recall of the entire memory. We examined this possibility by having participants view a series of neutral images and then randomly assigning them to one of four reactivation groups: control (no reactivation), distractor (reactivation of experimental procedures), component (image category reactivation), and descriptive (effortful description of the images). The experiment also included three retention intervals: 1 h, 9 days, and 28 days. Importantly, the participants received three reactivations equally spaced within their respective retention interval. At the end of the interval, all the participants were given an in-lab free-recall test in which they were asked to write down each image they remembered with as many details as possible. The data revealed that both the participants in the descriptive reactivation and component reactivation groups remembered significantly more than the participants in the control groups, with the effect being most pronounced in the 28-day retention interval condition. These findings suggest that memory reactivation, even component reactivation of a memory, makes memories more resistant to decay.},
keywords = {A, memory, psychology, recall, remember, repetition},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Memory reactivation is a process whereby cueing or recalling a long-term memory makes it enter a new active and labile state. Substantial evidence suggests that during this state the memory can be updated (e.g., adding information) and can become more vulnerable to disruption (e.g., brain insult). Memory reactivations can also prevent memory decay or forgetting. However, it is unclear whether cueing recall of a feature or component of the memory can benefit retention similarly to promoting recall of the entire memory. We examined this possibility by having participants view a series of neutral images and then randomly assigning them to one of four reactivation groups: control (no reactivation), distractor (reactivation of experimental procedures), component (image category reactivation), and descriptive (effortful description of the images). The experiment also included three retention intervals: 1 h, 9 days, and 28 days. Importantly, the participants received three reactivations equally spaced within their respective retention interval. At the end of the interval, all the participants were given an in-lab free-recall test in which they were asked to write down each image they remembered with as many details as possible. The data revealed that both the participants in the descriptive reactivation and component reactivation groups remembered significantly more than the participants in the control groups, with the effect being most pronounced in the 28-day retention interval condition. These findings suggest that memory reactivation, even component reactivation of a memory, makes memories more resistant to decay.