Episodic Memory
Guess First Task
Also called: pretesting effect task, unsuccessful retrieval task, errorful generation task
Compare memory after guessing before study with memory after reading. Participants learn word pairs, then recall their second words.
7-9 minUntimed
Free to start: 10 free participants per account, then $0.99 per participant for academic research, or any yearly plan. Try it here first, with no account.
- Papers, 2021 to 2025
- 65
- Evidence grade
- D
- Registered clinical studies
- 0
What it measures
Measures how guessing before study affects memory. Participants guess the second word of half the pairs before seeing it, read the other pairs, then recall the second words.
Constructs
- Pretesting
- Cued recall
- Learning from errors
- Study strategies
Research uses
- Research on learning and memory
- Comparing study strategies
- Research on errorful learning
How the paradigm works
Guessing before studying an answer can improve later memory, even when the guess is wrong. The Guess First Task compares guess-then-study with reading alone. It measures the pretesting effect in cued recall.
More about the paradigm
Participants learn 24 original word pairs in their session language. For half the pairs they see a cue and have eight seconds to type and submit a guess, then see the correct pair for five seconds. If they submit early, the cue remains until the eight seconds have elapsed. The other pairs appear together for thirteen seconds, matching total study time. Pair assignment and study and test orders come from the session seed. Two separate pairs provide practice. After 30 seconds of true-or-false arithmetic, participants type each pair’s second word with no time limit. The arithmetic delay can be set from 0 to 120 seconds.
The primary score is final recall after guessing minus final recall after reading, including every assigned pair. Secondary scores describe recall after wrong guesses, initial correct and blank guesses, overall recall and completion. Recall matches the designated target or a listed spelling form after case, accents and punctuation are normalized; no approximate spelling is accepted. Responses under 100 ms count as incorrect.
Kornell, Hays and Bjork compared guessing with reading under matched total exposure time. These original language-specific pairs and shorter delay adapt that design. Their association strengths have not been normed. Compare results within language and study; norms are off.
Scores
- Guess First Advantage%
- Final recall after guessing minus recall after reading, over all assigned pairs.
- Positive values favor guessing before study
- Recall After Guessing%
- Share of pretested pairs recalled at the end.
- Higher is better
- Recall After Reading%
- Share of read-only pairs recalled at the end.
- Higher is better
- Recall After Wrong Guesses%
- Final recall of pairs with a nonblank wrong guess. Blank if none.
- Describes the wrong-guess subset
- Wrong Guess Advantage%
- Recall after wrong guesses minus read-only recall.
- A selected subset; compare alongside the primary contrast
- Overall Recall%
- Share of all final pairs recalled.
- Higher is better
- Pairs Recalledcount
- Number of correct final answers.
- Higher is better
- Correct Guessescount
- Initial guesses that matched their target.
- Informational
- Wrong Guessescount
- Nonblank incorrect guesses, excluding anticipations.
- Expected during pretesting
- Blank Guessescount
- Guesses not submitted before the time limit, or submitted empty.
- Review if all guesses are blank
- Blank Final Answerscount
- Final recall answers left blank.
- Informational
- Anticipationscount
- Guess and recall responses under 100 ms, scored as incorrect.
- Quality check
- Paste Attemptscount
- Blocked pastes or drops during guesses or recall.
- Quality check
- Arithmetic Accuracy%
- Share of answered delay calculations that were correct.
- Chance is 0.5
- Arithmetic Answerscount
- Number of answered delay calculations; blank without a delay.
- Quality check
- Pairs Testedcount
- Final recall rows in the scored run, including blanks.
- Compare with the planned count
- Planned Pairscount
- Number of final pairs planned, 24.
- Informational
Use and evidence
65 papers from 2021 to 2025 name this task in their title or abstract, up 62% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 321 of 582 test families in our census. See the counts for every test.
Show the numbers
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 25 |
| 2024 | 12 |
| 2023 | 9 |
| 2022 | 5 |
| 2021 | 14 |
| 2020 | 15 |
| 2019 | 12 |
| 2018 | 6 |
| 2017 | 3 |
| 2016 | 4 |
| 2015 | 1 |
| 2014 | 3 |
| 2013 | 4 |
| 2012 | 5 |
| 2011 | 0 |
| 2010 | 1 |
| 2009 | 4 |
| 2008 | 0 |
| 2007 | 0 |
| 2006 | 0 |
| 2005 | 0 |
| 2004 | 2 |
| 2003 | 1 |
| 2002 | 2 |
| 2001 | 0 |
| 2000 | 1 |
Use grade D
30 to 99 papers from 2021 to 2025.
Evidence grade D
Little published measurement evidence found.
- Papers on test-retest reliability
- 0
- Papers on reliability or validity
- 3
- Registered clinical studies using it as an outcome
- 0
Measured on ConductCognition
Pooled across the studies that feed our platform norms, by device group. A figure needs 50 or more people.
No pooled figure yet.
How the grades work
Use: A is 1,000 or more papers from 2021 to 2025, B 300 to 999, C 100 to 299, D 30 to 99 and E fewer than 30. Evidence: A means at least 25 papers report its test-retest reliability and at least 25 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome; B, at least 8 test-retest papers, and either 5 registered clinical studies or 150 reliability or validity papers; C, at least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies; D, little published measurement evidence found. The counts measure use. They include every paper that names the task in its title or abstract. Grades describe the published research on this task, not ConductCognition's version of it.
Source: ConductCognition test census 0.39.0, counted 8 November 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Task design
The trial sequence as the test runs in ConductCognition.
- Pairs
- 24 original noun pairs in each of eight languages, with two separate practice pairs. Each pair has one designated target.
- Guess first
- 12 cues with an eight-second guess window, followed by five seconds showing the correct pair. Early submission leaves the cue on screen for the rest of the guess window.
- Read only
- 12 pairs shown together for thirteen seconds, matching the total time of the guess-first condition.
- Delay
- 30 seconds of true-or-false arithmetic, configurable from 0 to 120 seconds.
- Recall
- All 24 cues, in a new seeded order. Type the designated target with no time limit; a blank answer is allowed.
- Scoring
- Case, accents and punctuation are normalized. Listed spelling forms are accepted; there is no fuzzy matching. Answers under 100 ms count as incorrect.
- Comparison
- The primary contrast includes all assigned pairs. A separate score reports final recall after nonblank wrong guesses.
An adaptation of the pretesting method using original pairs and a shorter delay. Word associations vary by language; compare within language. Norms are off.
Quality checks
Each session is marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason, before you see its scores.
Scored rows: guess_first_test from the most complete run, with guesses and arithmetic from that run. Typed recall has no chance level. Incomplete tests, no recall, no guesses, repeated answers, paste attempts and uncompleted or chance-level arithmetic are flagged. Responses under 100 ms count as incorrect; a majority under 200 ms invalidates. A hidden tab withholds the percentile.
Why these rules
Guessing before seeing the target is the study manipulation; errors in those guesses are expected. There is no correct option to compare with chance, so accuracy is not judged against chance. An answer under 200 ms is faster than a simple visual reaction, so it cannot reflect the item. Following response-time effort screening for untimed tests (Wise and Kong 2005), the session is invalid only when at least half the answers are that fast. A hidden tab lets the study, delay or response timers run without the participant, so a percentile is withheld after one.
No percentile. Scores and quality flags only.
Running this test
Settings you can change
| Setting | Standard | Allowed |
|---|---|---|
| Arithmetic before recall (seconds) | 30 | 0 to 120 |
Yearly plans can change settings within these limits. Free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Need a setting this test does not have?
Devices and languages
- Untimed test: runs on desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. Participant devices
- Languages: English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese.
- Available on: Every plan, including the free plan.
- No percentile. Scores and quality flags only. How norms work
- Recruiting online? See the setup guides for Prolific, Sona Systems, CloudResearch Connect and Qualtrics.
Cite and describe
Participants completed the Guess First Task in a web browser (ConductCognition task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0; Kornell, Hays & Bjork, 2009), with the standard settings (arithmetic before recall (seconds): 30). The main score was guess first advantage (final recall after guessing minus recall after reading, over all assigned pairs).
ConductCognition versions: task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0. Every export records the versions each session used, for a methods section.
- Kornell, N., Hays, M. J., & Bjork, R. A. (2009). Unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhance subsequent learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(4), 989-998. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015729
Source papers
- Kornell N, Hays MJ, Bjork RA (2009). Unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhance subsequent learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(4):989-998.Paradigm source, Adults
Questions
How long does the Guess First Task take?
About 7 to 9 minutes, as listed in the test library.
What device does a participant need?
Untimed test: runs on desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. The browser must be Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.
What scores does it produce?
Guess First Advantage, Recall After Guessing, Recall After Reading, Recall After Wrong Guesses, Wrong Guess Advantage, Overall Recall, Pairs Recalled, Correct Guesses, Wrong Guesses, Blank Guesses, Blank Final Answers, Anticipations, Paste Attempts, Arithmetic Accuracy, Arithmetic Answers, Pairs Tested and Planned Pairs. Each session is also marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason.
How widely is the Guess First Task used in research?
65 papers from 2021 to 2025 name it in their title or abstract, up 62% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 321 of 582 test families in the ConductCognition test census (use grade D). Source: ConductCognition test census 0.39.0, counted 8 November 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
How much reliability evidence does the Guess First Task have?
In the published research, 0 papers report its test-retest reliability and 0 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome (evidence grade D in the ConductCognition test census).
Does it report a percentile?
No. Scores and quality flags only.
Which settings can a researcher change?
Arithmetic before recall (seconds) (0 to 120). Settings can be changed on yearly plans; free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Which languages can participants use?
Participants can take this test in English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese, with its words in the same language. English is on every plan, and the other languages come with yearly plans. Have a native speaker read the machine-translated text before launch.
Is this a clinical test?
No. ConductCognition is for research use only. It runs, scores and exports the test; clinical interpretation is outside the platform.
Every test: the full test list.
Run this test in your next study
Start free with 10 free participants on any test, then use participant credits or a yearly plan.