Retrieval Practice Principles: A Theory of Learning for Naming Rehabilitation

Abstract

Event Abstract Back to Event Retrieval Practice Principles: A Theory of Learning for Naming Rehabilitation Erica Middleton1* 1 Moss Rehabilitation Research Institute, United States This presentation reviews progress towards development of a theory of learning for naming impairment in aphasia that is based on powerful learning principles derived from basic psychological research (i.e., retrieval practice or RP principles): (a) retrieving information from long-term memory (i.e., retrieval practice) strengthens the future accessibility of that information, especially when retrieval is effortful (for reviews, see [1-2]); (b) learning is superior when repeated training opportunities for an item are spaced over time as opposed to massed (for reviews, see [3-4]). The standard paradigm in the psychological literature for delineating how retrieval practice impacts learning begins with initial familiarization of the to-be-learned (i.e., target) information. Familiarization is followed by a training phase in which the information is either presented again in its entirety for further study opportunities (restudy), or tests are administered in which participants attempt to retrieve the target information from long-term memory (i.e., retrieval practice). A retrieval practice effect is demonstrated when performance on a later test is greater following retrieval practice training compared to restudy training. The spacing effect refers to superior performance on a later test following spaced versus massed practice schedules. In spaced schedules, an item’s training trials are separated by enough time or intervening material to exceed the limits of short-term memory, in contrast to massed trials in which the item remains accessible in short-term memory. The current studies explore the applicability of the RP principles for treating lexical access deficits in chronic aphasia, or difficulty reliably and fluently retrieving known words for production as manifest in picture naming. The studies seek to explicate the relevance of the RP principles for treating affected vocabulary, (i.e., the focus is on item-specific treatment effects). Each study employs a within-subjects design where items that elicit naming error for a participant are matched into different training conditions. The effects of training are measured on retention tests of naming administered in later sessions. In two initial studies [5-6], naming treatment that emphasized retrieval practice (i.e., confrontation naming) conferred superior retention test performance compared to errorless learning naming treatment. In errorless learning, the name is provided and the PWA repeats the name for the object (i.e., word repetition task), a procedure that eliminates errors during treatment but also bypasses retrieval practice. Also, retention test performance was superior when multiple training trials for an item were presented in a spaced versus a massed schedule [6]. In these studies [5-6], items were only trained in one session and retention tests were administered at 1-day and 1-week following training. A third study examined whether retrieval practice and spacing principles apply when items are trained in dosages more representative of clinical practice (i.e., in multiple sessions). In that study, a retrieval practice effect and spacing effect were found after 1-week, with the retrieval practice effect persisting after 1-month. The presentation concludes with preliminary findings suggesting that the potency of retrieval practice versus errorless learning varies as a function of the locus (i.e., lexical-semantic versus phonological) of naming impairment.