---
type: permanent
status: mature
created: "2026-01-27"
description: "Memory retrieval is most effective when the retrieval context matches the original encoding context"
tags:
  - memory
  - retrieval
  - context
---

# Encoding Specificity

The encoding specificity principle (Tulving & Thomson, 1973) states that memory retrieval is most effective when the retrieval context matches the encoding context. The cues present during learning become part of the memory trace.

## Examples

- Students perform better on tests in the same room where they studied
- Mood-congruent memory: information learned in a happy mood is better recalled when happy
- State-dependent learning: information encoded under the influence of caffeine is better recalled with caffeine

## Implications

- Varying study contexts creates multiple retrieval cues, making memories more robust (this supports [[Interleaving]] and [[Desirable Difficulties]])
- Over-reliance on one context creates fragile memories that only work in that setting
- [[Transfer of Learning]] requires encoding in ways that are abstract enough to generalise

## Paradox with Spacing

The [[Spacing Effect]] partially works because spaced sessions naturally vary context, creating richer retrieval cue networks. This enriched encoding makes memories accessible from more starting points.

## Connections

- Explains part of why the [[Spacing Effect]] works (context variation)
- [[Transfer of Learning]] requires overcoming encoding specificity through abstraction
- [[Interleaving]] naturally varies context within sessions
- Informs the [[Testing Effect]] -- test context should approximate real-world use
- [[Elaborative Interrogation]] creates additional semantic cues beyond context

#memory #retrieval #context
