Skip to content
PaperFren

Long-term memory

Which parts of the fast-mapping task help adults learn new words?

Cooper E, Greve A, Henson RN · Frontiers in psychology · 2019

Open access · cc by · source: Europe PMC

Removing the supposedly key ingredients of the fast-mapping task, a known comparison object and a question requiring inference, did not make healthy adults any worse at remembering new object names.

Study at a glance

Design
Human experiment — Four experiments: three within-participant lab studies (two young, one older group) comparing fast-mapping variants, plus a large between-participant online study adding an explicit-encoding condition.
N
N=267 · 24 participants in each of Experiments 1-3 (72 in the combined analysis; Experiment 3 were older adults aged 59-76) plus 195 young adults in Experiment 4 (39 per condition).
Population
Healthy native British English-speaking adults: young (18-40) and older (59-76) volunteers from a Cambridge panel, and young UK adults recruited online via Prolific.
Outcome
Explicit memory for newly learned names of unfamiliar animals and plants, measured by three-alternative forced-choice accuracy (and free recall in Experiment 4).

Structured fields used in claim comparison tables when every cited study has a complete layer.

Key findings

No experiment showed worse memory when components were removed, and Bayes factors mostly favoured no difference. In Experiments 2 and 3 memory was actually best when both components were removed (pooled accuracy rose from 0.59 to 0.67 across 72 participants), which the authors attribute to lower cognitive load, but this reversal vanished when only first blocks were analysed and in the between-participant Experiment 4. Experiment 4 did replicate the usual finding that deliberate explicit encoding beats every fast-mapping variant, showing the design was sensitive enough to detect real differences.

Methodology

Fast mapping is a way of learning a new name incidentally, for example by answering 'Is the numbat's tail pointed up?' while seeing a numbat next to a zebra; it has been claimed to let amnesic patients learn without the hippocampus. The researchers built variants that removed the known object (the semantic referent), the feature question (the semantic inference), or both, and tested memory for the names with a three-choice picture test after a short filled delay. Experiments 1 and 2 used young adults, Experiment 3 older adults, and Experiment 4 gave each of 195 online participants only one condition, including a standard 'remember this name' explicit encoding condition.

Limitations

All participants were healthy, so the results cannot rule out that these components matter for people with hippocampal amnesia, where fast mapping was originally claimed to help. Memory was tested only explicitly; an implicit measure might reveal differences between variants. The within-participant experiments had modest samples of 24 and may have let participants guess that memory would be tested after the first block, and the online Experiment 4 produced lower overall accuracy than the lab studies.

How this study connects

Role on claims

Each row is a claim on a concept or method page where this paper supports, challenges, or qualifies the statement. Roles are hand-checked — not a model guess.

Not yet placed on a claim. This paper has study layers, but no concept page yet cites it as support, challenge, or qualifier.

Related papers in this topic

Same topic cluster — not a recommendation engine.