1. Effects on Massed and Spaced Repetition and Recognition Memory in Spanish-English Bilinguals Diana G. Manzanera Supervisor: Dr. Wendy S. Francis University of Texas at El Paso Supported by a Teachers for a New Era Mini-Grant

2. Purpose  The purpose of this study was to determine the difference in spacing effect between the dominant and non-dominant language.

3. Introduction  There are no studies that compare performance on recognition memory tasks in the dominant and non-dominant language  Explicit memory performance in bilinguals might be compared to the effects of divided attention and word frequency Divided attention impairs recognition performance Divided attention impairs recognition performance Low-frequency words are easier to discriminate on a recognition test than high frequency words Low-frequency words are easier to discriminate on a recognition test than high frequency words These suggest opposite effects for recognition in the non-dominant language These suggest opposite effects for recognition in the non-dominant language

4. Introduction  Spacing effect: demonstrated that words that are repeated with intervening items between them increase performance on explicit memory tasks such as recognition and free recall tests.  Spacing effect is influenced by divided attention and word frequency. Divided attention eliminates the spacing effect in a recognition test. Divided attention eliminates the spacing effect in a recognition test. Low frequency words that are spaced are more easily discriminated in a recognition test than low frequency words that are massed. Low frequency words that are spaced are more easily discriminated in a recognition test than low frequency words that are massed.

5. Example  Massed AppleApple PillowPillow AppleApple HorseHorse  Spaced Apple Pillow Horse Pool Butterfly Carrot Lizard Apple

6. Predictions  According to divided attention effect Words that are presented in a non-dominant language will show worse performance on recognition tasks and eliminate or reduce the spacing effect Words that are presented in a non-dominant language will show worse performance on recognition tasks and eliminate or reduce the spacing effect  According to word frequency effect Words that are presented in the non-dominant language will be more easily discriminated and show a spacing effect. Words that are presented in the non-dominant language will be more easily discriminated and show a spacing effect.

7. Participants  Adolescents Spanish-English bilingual students in the TexPrep summer science program. Spanish-English bilingual students in the TexPrep summer science program. N= 55 N= 55 Ages 11-17 Ages 11-17 43 Spanish dominant 43 Spanish dominant 12 English dominant 12 English dominant  Adults Spanish-English bilingual UTEP students N= 64 Ages 17-48 40 Spanish dominant 24 English dominant

8. Design The study was a 2 (language) x 4 (conditions) within subjects design Once (1st-half) Once (2nd-half) Twice Massed Twice Spaced Non-studied items (foils on the recognition test) Test had 50% studied, 50% non-studied items

9. Procedure Two sessions (English-Spanish)  Adolescents Language background Language background Study task Study task List of words on worksheetList of words on worksheet Copied each word on a blank space next to itCopied each word on a blank space next to it Distracter task Distracter task Recognition test Recognition test List of words on a worksheetList of words on a worksheet Circled words that they studied during the study phaseCircled words that they studied during the study phase  Adults Consent form Language background Study task Words presented one at a time Copied each word in a booklet Distracter task Recognition test Words presented one at a time Press YES if the word was presented in the study form or NO otherwise

10. Adolescent Results.

11. Respond No Respond Yes

12. Adult Results

13. Respond No Respond Yes

14. Adult Results

15. Summary of Results  No significant difference between dominant and non- dominant language.  Significant difference between words that appeared once and words that appeared twice  No significant difference between words appeared in the 1 st -half and words appeared in 2 nd -half.  No significant difference between massed and spaced repetitions  No significant interaction between language and conditions. The limitations of the study did not let us compare the spacing effect in the dominant and non-dominant language. The limitations of the study did not let us compare the spacing effect in the dominant and non-dominant language.

16. Discussion  Weak support for attention account Slightly better performance in words presented in dominant language than in non-dominant language. Slightly better performance in words presented in dominant language than in non-dominant language.  Comparison of adolescents and adults Adolescents and adults showed similar patterns of performance. Adolescents and adults showed similar patterns of performance. Adolescents were more conservative in answering YES. Adolescents were more conservative in answering YES. Groups had nearly identical d’ for once-presented words, but adults were better at discriminating twice-presented words. Groups had nearly identical d’ for once-presented words, but adults were better at discriminating twice-presented words.  Future experiments Increase the number of repetitions for spaced words Increase the number of repetitions for spaced words Massed words should be immediately followed by their repetition Massed words should be immediately followed by their repetition Increase the time of the distracter task (retention interval) Increase the time of the distracter task (retention interval)

17. Acknowledgements  Dr. Wendy S. Francis  Teachers for a New Era Mini-Grant  Dr. Sally Blake and the TexPrep program