Repeated retention testing effects do not generalize to a contextual interference protocol

Three experiments examined repeated retention testing effects in a contextual interference (CI) protocol. Retention was assessed at 10 min and 24 hr following acquisition or at just 24-hr for the one-test conditions. Experiments 1 and 2 used speeded-response key-pressing tasks. Dependent measures were total time and errors. Experiment 3 used sequential-timing tasks. Dependent measures were absolute error and absolute constant error Results revealed CI effects in each experiment. Repeated retention testing effects were not found in Experiments 1 and 3. Experiment 2 revealed superior performance by the two-test condition compared to the one-test condition. This result was qualified by possible practice effects during the 10-min test. It was concluded that repeated retention testing does not present problems for most studies of CI.     

Repeated Retention Testing Effects Do Not Generalize to a Contextual Interference Protocol

Three experiments examined repeated retention testing effects in a contextual interference (CI) protocol. Retention was assessed at 10 min and 24 hr following acquisition or at just 24-hr for the one-test conditions. Experiments 1 and 2 used speeded-response key-pressing tasks. Dependent measures were total time and errors. Experiment 3 used sequential-timing tasks. Dependent measures were absolute error and absolute constant error. Results revealed CI effects in each experiment. Repeated retention testing effects were not found in Experiments 1 and 3. Experiment 2 revealed superior performance by the two-test condition compared to the one-test condition. This result was qualified by possible practice effects during the 10-min test. It was concluded that repeated retention testing does not present problems for most studies of CI.