Abstract
The testing effect is a well-established phenomenon in which memory is better for learned information that has been retrieved in a practice test than for learned information that is restudied. Interestingly, the testing effect has almost exclusively been studied using verbal content. Is the testing effect a general property of learning, or does it occur only for verbal information? To investigate this question, we created novel, abstract visual objects composed of a shape and fill pattern. Following initial study of all objects, half of the objects were restudied while the other half underwent recall practice. Recall practice involved presenting one feature (just shape or fill pattern) and having participants visualize the corresponding feature. Then participants either selected the feature they were imagining out of two options (Exp. 1-9) or they drew the feature they were imagining (Exp. 10) followed by feedback. After the re-study/recall practice phase, all objects were tested with final recall and recognition tests. Different experiments manipulated the retention interval, type of feedback, form of restudy, and amount of recall practice, and yet in no case was performance significantly better following recall practice than following restudy. This unexpected result suggests that the testing effect is not a universal process. Two possibilities could explain this finding – either the participants were unable to precisely and accurately recall the visual information, or visual recall was accurate but failed to elicit the expected testing effect. If participants are failing to accurately recall the information, this could lead to either strengthening of incorrect memories or failure to strengthen the correct information. Alternatively, perhaps recall is accurate, but the lack of semantic content precludes any test benefit. Overall, our results suggest that there is no testing effect for purely visual material and that semantic content may be essential to producing a testing effect.