[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The authors present 3 experiments demonstrating ways to reduce illegal moves in problem-solving tasks. They propose a 3-stage framework for the rejection of illegal moves. An illegal move must come to mind and be selected, checked for legality, and correctly rejected. Illegal move reduction can occur at any stage. Control group participants benefited from solving the same problem twice but failed to show transfer to an isomorph, replicating results from S. K. Reed, G. W. Ernst, and R. Banerji (1974). Participants who were penalized for making illegal moves showed reductions in illegal moves even when solving a novel isomorph without penalty. The authors propose that illegal move reduction occurs when solvers are cautious and check moves for legality frequently.
Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition 08/2005; 31(4):670-82. · 3.10 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Memory for repeated items often improves when repetitions are separated by other items—a phenomenon called the spacing effect. In two experiments, we explored the complex interaction between study strategies, serial position, and spacing effects. When people studied several unmixed lists, they initially used mainly rote rehearsal, but some people eventually adopted relational encoding strategies like creating a story from the items (Experiment 1). We observed overall spacing effects when participants used the story mnemonic, but not when they employed rote rehearsal strategies (Experiments 1 and 2). This occurred in part because the story mnemonic reduced or eliminated the usual recall advantage of immediately repeated items at the beginning of lists (Experiment 2).
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: In 4 experiments, instructions to plan a task (water jugs) that normally produces little planning altered how participants solved the problems and resulted in enhanced learning and memory. Experiment 1 identified planning strategies that allowed participants to plan full solutions to water jugs problems. Experiment 2 showed that experience with planning led to better solutions even after planning was no longer required, whereas control participants showed little improvement. Experiments 3 and 4 showed that although the most recent planned solution could be recalled following a long filled retention interval, retroactive interference (RI) between successive problems resulted in much lower recall of earlier solutions. RI during plan generation could also explain participants' choice of depth-first planning strategies.
Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition 12/2004; 30(6):1219-34. · 3.10 Impact Factor