MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2414123730 · doi:10.1037/cep0000094

The benefits of studying by production . . . And of studying production: Introduction to the special issue on the production effect in memory.

2016· article· en· W2414123730 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Glen E. Bodner, Colin M. MacLeod

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory Processes and Influences
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsycINFOProduction (economics)PsychologySet (abstract data type)Cognitive psychologySimplicityCognitive scienceComputer scienceEpistemologyMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The production effect refers to enhanced memory for materials that were produced at study (e.g., those read aloud) relative to materials that were not produced (e.g., those read silently). The effect has generated a wave of interest since being named in 2010 (MacLeod, Gopie, Hourihan, Neary, and Ozubko, 2010)-likely because of the simplicity of production tasks and of the substantial memory improvements that they can yield. This special issue of the Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology brings together 10 new studies on the production effect in memory. Our introduction provides an expanded definition of the effect along with some examples to help orient readers. The present studies contribute to our understanding of the production effect and to memory more broadly. Just as important, they also raise new questions and provide a honed set of methodological tools that will help to guide further research and theorizing about memory. (PsycINFO Database Record

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.591

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentaleSame topicMemory Processes and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207