↓ Skip to main content

Deconstructing the effect of self-directed study on episodic memory

Overview of attention for article published in Memory & Cognition, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
134 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Deconstructing the effect of self-directed study on episodic memory
Published in
Memory & Cognition, June 2014
DOI 10.3758/s13421-014-0435-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Douglas Markant, Sarah DuBrow, Lila Davachi, Todd M. Gureckis

Abstract

Self-directed learning is often associated with better long-term memory retention; however, the mechanisms that underlie this advantage remain poorly understood. This series of experiments was designed to "deconstruct" the notion of self-directed learning, in order to better identify the factors most responsible for these improvements to memory. In particular, we isolated the memory advantage that comes from controlling the content of study episodes from the advantage that comes from controlling the timing of those episodes. Across four experiments, self-directed learning significantly enhanced recognition memory, relative to passive observation. However, the advantage for self-directed learning was found to be present even under extremely minimal conditions of volitional control (simply pressing a button when a participant was ready to advance to the next item). Our results suggest that improvements to memory following self-directed encoding may be related to the ability to coordinate stimulus presentation with the learner's current preparatory or attentional state, and they highlight the need to consider the range of cognitive control processes involved in and influenced by self-directed study.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 134 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
France 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 128 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 21%
Researcher 20 15%
Student > Bachelor 20 15%
Student > Master 15 11%
Professor 7 5%
Other 30 22%
Unknown 14 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 58 43%
Neuroscience 16 12%
Social Sciences 8 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Computer Science 4 3%
Other 23 17%
Unknown 21 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 November 2023.
All research outputs
#7,585,134
of 24,900,093 outputs
Outputs from Memory & Cognition
#476
of 1,627 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,629
of 233,734 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Memory & Cognition
#4
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,900,093 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,627 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 233,734 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.