The influence of retrieval on retention

Four experiments tested the hypothesis that successful retrieval of an item from memory affects retention only because the retrieval provides an additional presentation of the target item. Two methods of learning paired associates were compared. In the pure study trial (pure ST condition) method, both items of a pair were presented simultaneously for study. In the test trial/study trial (TTST condition) method, subjects attempted to retrieve the response term during a period in which only the stimulus term was present (and the response term of the pair was presented after a 5-sec delay). Final retention of target items was tested with cued-recall tests. In Experiment 1, there was a reliable advantage in final testing for nonsense-syllable/number pairs in the TTST condition over pairs in the pure ST condition. In Experiment 2, the same result was obtained with Eskimo/English word pairs. This benefit of the TTST condition was not apparently different for final retrieval after 5 min or after 24 h. Experiments 3 and 4 ruled out two artifactual explanations of the TTST advantage observed in the first two experiments. Because performing a memory retrieval (TTST condition) led to better performance than pure study (pure ST condition), the results reject the hypothesis that a successful retrieval is beneficial only to the extent that it provides another study experience.     

Body image and comprehension of body part names

The relation between awareness of body topology and auditory comprehension of body part names was studied in 22 aphasic subjects. Two nonverbal tasks—human figure drawing and placement of individual body parts in relation to a drawn face—were compared with two auditory tests of body part comprehension. The two nonverbal and the two verbal tasks were closely correlated with each other, but there was no relation involving either of the verbal tests with either of the nonverbal tests. Selection errors in the auditory comprehension tasks were predominantly semantically based and equally distributed between functionally analogous parts and parts related by location on the body.Dr. Benedet's effort in this study was supported by a grant from the Hispano-North American Joint Committee for Cultural and Educational Cooperation.     

Guidelines are not enough: The need for written sentencing opinions

Guideline sentencing systems, including the new federal guidelines, have not settled on a clear conception of when and how a trial judge should explain sentences. Indeterminate sentencing systems did not have a tradition of written sentencing decisions and recent sentencing reforms do not focus on the trial judge's role. This article suggests the many advantages of written sentencing opinions. Initial experience under the federal sentencing guidelines bolsters the conclusion that written sentencing opinions in appropriate cases—including both sentences “within” guidelines and guideline “departures”—are the next step in the evolving law of sentencing and the best way to recognize trial judges as an essential engine of principled change.