To successfully learn words, children must map words to referents in the presence of competitor objects, and retain thesemappings across time. Past research suggests that competitor repetition supports word mapping. However, these studieshave not implemented delayed tests. Relying on a desirable difficulties framework, we predicted that competitor variabilitywould lead to better long-term retention of novel words. To test this prediction, children ages 2-6 completed a novel wordlearning task. Children were assigned to a competitor repetition or competitor variation condition. In Experiment 1,we tested retention of novel word-referent mappings at an immediate and 10-minute delayed test. In Experiment 2, weassessed whether retrieval dynamics during learning explained retention performance. Results revealed that competitorvariation engendered less retrieval success during learning. Competitor variation also reduced forgetting of novel wordsacross time. We highlight the importance of moving beyond immediate tests when characterizing competition in wordlearning.

Spacing out information promotes retention more than massing information – a robust finding in psychological science. Research on the spacing effect has primarily manipulated aspects of the learning schedule (e.g., item repetitions, retention interval). Limited work has considered how familiarity with the to-be-learned information impacts the spacing effect. The current study addressed this gap by examining how word frequency/familiarity affects retention on a massed or spaced schedule. One-hundred adults were presented with 24 high familiarity (e.g., apple), low familiarity (e.g., vestige), or nonsense (e.g., blicket) words on a massed and spaced schedule. Retrieval was tested after a 5-minute delay, revealing a significant spacing effect regardless of word familiarity. Furthermore, overall performance was significantly greater for highly familiar items. These results suggest that spacing is effective regardless of general word familiarity. Future studies will assess how learners’ prior knowledge of test items – as measured by a vocabulary test – impacts the spacing effect.

Science misconceptions persist across development and have long-term consequences for achievement. Researchers haveattempted to replace science misconceptions with correct information. Intentional forgetting, often studied using a directedforgetting (DF) paradigm, is one approach used to eliminate incorrect material. The present study aimed to identify whichscience misconceptions persist among adults and determine whether DF can be implemented to forget misconceptions. 147undergraduates saw two lists of 11 science statements. For each statement, they provided a truthfulness and confidencerating before receiving the correct True/False rating. Half were told to remember both lists; half were told to forget thefirst list and remember the second. Results revealed that although accuracy and confidence increased overall, there weresignificant differences between science domains and no observable DF effect. This suggests that science misconceptionsare even more persistent than previously thought, particularly for certain domains, and additional supports are needed tocorrect them.

Interleaving–as opposed to blocking–information improves learning of categories, such as artists’ painting styles (Kornell & Bjork, 2008). The aim of the present study was to replicate this finding and to assess whether blocked and interleaved schedules result in different patterns of visual attention during learning. For this purpose, 116 participants (Mean age: 19.98 years, SD = 1.68) studied paintings from 12 different artists on either a blocked or interleaved schedule. Participants then identified the artists for a series of new paintings. The results replicated prior research: Participants were significantly better at learning the painting styles for artists whose paintings were presented on an interleaved schedule. Furthermore, the distribution of visual attention to the stimuli differed between the two presentation schedules; participants scanned the screen more on interleaved presentations. Future studies will assess how individual differences in attention, working memory, and prior knowledge impact the magnitude of the spacing effect.

Interleaving, as opposed to blocking, information improves learning of categories, such as artists' painting styles. The current study examined whether presentation schedules also impact memory for specific items. 179 participants studied paintings from 12 different artists on either a blocked or interleaved schedule. In Study 1 (N = 84), participants were then asked to either identify the artists of a series of paintings (style recognition task) or determine whether they had previously seen a specific painting (item recognition task). In Study 2 (N = 93), participants completed both tasks. Results showed that the interleaved schedule led to better learning of the painting styles, but did not impact item memory. However, when participants had to recognize the style and the painting for an artist on the interleaved schedule, they incorrectly thought that they had previously seen the painting. This finding illustrates the dynamic relationship between item memory and category learning.