Publication Date
| In 2025 | 0 |
| Since 2024 | 0 |
| Since 2021 (last 5 years) | 0 |
| Since 2016 (last 10 years) | 1 |
| Since 2006 (last 20 years) | 1 |
Descriptor
| Cognitive Processes | 1 |
| Comparative Analysis | 1 |
| Foreign Countries | 1 |
| Hypothesis Testing | 1 |
| Memory | 1 |
| Oral Reading | 1 |
| Recognition (Psychology) | 1 |
| Silent Reading | 1 |
| Statistical Analysis | 1 |
| Undergraduate Students | 1 |
| Word Lists | 1 |
| More ▼ | |
Source
| Journal of Experimental… | 1 |
Author
| Forrin, Noah D. | 1 |
| Groot, Brianna | 1 |
| MacLeod, Colin M. | 1 |
Publication Type
| Journal Articles | 1 |
| Reports - Research | 1 |
Education Level
| Higher Education | 1 |
| Postsecondary Education | 1 |
Audience
Location
| Canada | 1 |
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Peer reviewed
Direct linkForrin, Noah D.; Groot, Brianna; MacLeod, Colin M. – Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2016
It can be difficult to judge the effectiveness of encoding techniques in a within-subject design. Consider the "production effect"--the finding that words read aloud are better remembered than words read silently. In the absence of a baseline, a within-subject production effect in a mixed study list could reflect a benefit of reading…
Descriptors: Cognitive Processes, Oral Reading, Silent Reading, Word Lists
