Search

Previous research has shown that survival-related processing of word lists enhances retention for that material. However, the claim that survival-related memories are more accurate has only been examined when true recall and recognition of neutral material has been measured. In the current experiments, we examined the adaptive memory superiority effect for different types of processing and material, measuring accuracy more directly by comparing true and false recollection rates. Survival-related information and processing was examined using word lists containing backward associates of neutral, negative, and survival-related critical lures and type of processing (pleasantness, moving, survival) was varied using an incidental memory paradigm. Across four experiments, results showed that survival-related words were more susceptible than negative and neutral words to the false memory illusion and that processing information in terms of its relevance to survival independently increased this susceptibility to the false memory illusion. Overall, although survival-related processing and survival-related information resulted in poorer, not more accurate, memory, such inaccuracies may have adaptive significance. These findings are discussed in the context of false memory research and recent theories concerning the importance of survival processing and the nature of adaptive memory.

Laboratory studies show that taking a test on studied material promotes subsequent learning and retention of that material on a final test (termed the testing effect). Educational research has virtually ignored testing as a technique to improve classroom learning. We investigated the testing effect in a college course. Students took weekly quizzes followed by multiple choice criterial tests (unit tests and a cumulative final). Weekly quizzes included multiple choice or short answer questions, after which feedback was provided. As an exposure control, in some weeks students were presented target material for additional reading. Quizzing, but not additional reading, improved performance on the criterial tests relative to material not targeted by quizzes. Further, short answer quizzes produced more robust benefits than multiple choice quizzes. This pattern converges with laboratory findings showing that recall tests are more beneficial than recognition tests for subsequent memory performance. We conclude that in the classroom testing can be used to promote learning, not just to evaluate learning.