Does retrieval practice protect memory against stress? A meta-analysis [Stage 1 Registered Report]use asterix (*) to get italics

Mariela Mihaylova, Matthias Kliegel, Nicolas RothenPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"

2023

<p>[Note: This is a Stage 1 Registered Report. All placeholders will be replaced with actual results by Stage 2.]</p> <p><br>Stressors such as test anxiety (TA) are known to decrease memory retrieval, whereas retrieval practice (RP) is the phenomenon that actively recalling information from memory enhances memory. Recent evidence suggests RP can protect memory against the negative effects of stress on memory (Agarwal et al., 2014; Smith &amp; Thomas, 2016), however the findings are mixed (Yang et al., 2020). Determining the overall effects of using RP to counteract the negative effects of stress on memory could transform our understanding of memory resilience and help design new cognitive interventions to protect memory in stressful situations when it could be impaired. This therefore raises the need for a meta-analytic summary of the literature to understand the effects of RP on memory in relation to stressors. In this registered report, we conducted a meta-analysis (k = [enter number of studies by Stage 2], total number of participants = [enter no. of participants by Stage 2]) of the impact of stress on learning with RP from [year/date of coverage], among [sample characteristics, if applicable, remove if irrelevant], using [databases and other information sources, Beller et al., 2013]. [Describe the eligibility criteria, Beller et al., 2013] We found [weak to no / mixed / substantial / strong] empirical evidence for the [Phenomenon name] hypothesis, [Hedge’s g / Cohen’s d / Other Effect Size Measure = X.XX, 95% CI [X.XX, X.XX]]., with [model(s), e.g., multivariate three-level model]. [Phenomenon name] is a meaningful effect for [measure(s)/dependent variable(s)]. Study heterogeneity was [low / low to medium / medium / medium to high / high], [Q(degrees of freedom) = XXX.XX, p = .XXX / &lt; .001, I² = XX.XX%]. [Summarize results of publication biases tests]. We tested several moderators: [list of possible moderators tested]. We found that [list of moderator(s) with meaningful moderation, if there were any] moderated [Phenomenon name]. [Phenomenon name] was stronger [list of conditions in which the effects were stronger, if there was/were]. [Brief descriptions of strengths and limitations, Beller et al., 2013, and future research directions] We registered our meta-analysis here, with datafile, code and supplementary: https://osf.io/jwx4f/?view_only=.</p>

retrieval practice, meta-analysis, registered report, memory, test anxiety, stress

NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).

Humanities, Social sciences

2023-02-16 14:39:06

Thomas Evans