The spacing effect depends on an encoding deficit, retrieval, and time in working memory: evidence from once-presented words.

The spacing effect in list learning occurs because identical massed items suffer encoding deficits and because spaced items benefit from retrieval and increased time in working memory. Requiring the retrieval of identical items produced a spacing effect for recall and recognition, both for intentional and incidental learning. Not requiring retrieval produced spacing only for intentional learning because intentional learning encourages retrieval. Once-presented words provided baselines for these effects. Next, massed and spaced word pairs were judged for matches on their first three letters, forcing retrieval. The words were not identical, so there was no encoding deficit. Retrieval could and did cause spacing only for the first word of each pair; time in working memory, only for the second.

Properties of word cues for autobiographical memory.

A sample of 124 words were used to cue autobiographical memories in 120 adults varying in age from 20 to 73 years. Individual words reliably cued autobiographical memories of different ages with different speeds. For all age groups, words rated high in imagery produced older memories and faster reaction times.

Distribution of important and word-cued autobiographical memories in 20-, 35-, and 70-year-old adults.

For word-cued autobiographical memories, older adults had an increase, or bump, from the ages 10 to 30. All age groups had fewer memories from childhood than from other years and a power-function retention for memories from the most recent 10 years. There were no consistent differences in reaction times and rating scale responses across decades. Concrete words cued older memories, but no property of the cues predicted which memories would come from the bump. The 5 most important memories given by 20- and 35-year-old participants were distributed similarly to their word-cued memories, but those given by 70-year-old participants came mostly from the single 20-to-30 decade. No theory fully accounts for the bump.