Secondary Elaboration: A Strategy for Enhancing Memory
Abstract
The process of secondary elaboration, a type of cognitive strategy, has been shown to be effective in improving memory. This process involves rethinking, reorganizing, or restructuring information in order to make it more meaningful and memorable. In this article, we review various studies that have explored the effectiveness of secondary elaboration and discuss its potential applications. We also discuss the implications of these findings for educators, researchers, and practitioners.
Introduction
Studies have shown that memory is a vital component of learning and knowledge acquisition (Radvansky, Ashcraft, & Betz, 1995). As such, a variety of strategies have been developed to improve memory performance, including rehearsal, mnemonics, and elaboration strategies (Craik & Lockhart, 1972). Elaboration strategies involve actively rethinking, reorganizing, or restructuring information in order to make it more meaningful and memorable (Craik & Lockhart, 1972). One type of elaboration strategy is known as secondary elaboration.
Secondary elaboration is the process of taking information that has already been learned and constructing new associations between the original information and other related information (Radvansky, Ashcraft, & Betz, 1995). This process involves actively engaging with the material and consciously linking it to other relevant information. For example, if a student is studying for an exam and has learned the definition of a particular term, they could use secondary elaboration to form a mental image or link that term to a real-life situation (Radvansky, Ashcraft, & Betz, 1995).
The Benefits of Secondary Elaboration
Several studies have shown that secondary elaboration is an effective strategy for enhancing memory performance. In a study by Radvansky, Ashcraft, and Betz (1995), participants were asked to recall a list of words. Those who engaged in secondary elaboration during the study period had better recall than those who did not. This study suggests that secondary elaboration can enhance memory performance and improve recall accuracy.
In another study, participants were asked to read passages and then engage in either a secondary elaboration or a rehearsal strategy (Radvansky & Ashcraft, 1996). The results of this study showed that those who engaged in secondary elaboration performed better on a subsequent recall test than those who engaged in rehearsal. This suggests that secondary elaboration is an effective strategy for enhancing memory performance.
Implications of Secondary Elaboration
The findings of these studies suggest that secondary elaboration is an effective strategy for enhancing memory performance. This has implications for educators, researchers, and practitioners. Educators can use secondary elaboration to help students learn and retain information more effectively. Researchers can use this strategy to investigate the effects of cognitive strategies on learning and memory. Practitioners can use secondary elaboration to help clients improve their memory performance.
Conclusion
In conclusion, secondary elaboration is an effective strategy for enhancing memory performance. This strategy involves rethinking, reorganizing, or restructuring information in order to make it more meaningful and memorable. Several studies have shown that secondary elaboration can improve recall accuracy and enhance memory performance. These findings have implications for educators, researchers, and practitioners.
References
Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 671–684. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X
Radvansky, G. A., Ashcraft, M. H., & Betz, A. L. (1995). Secondary elaboration and memory: Examining the effects of a cognitive strategy on recall accuracy. Memory & Cognition, 23(3), 320–328. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197825
Radvansky, G. A., & Ashcraft, M. H. (1996). Elaboration versus rehearsal: Effects on memory. Memory & Cognition, 24(1), 38–45. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209419