How to Remember Names: Evidence-Based Memory Techniques
Author: Angela Bogdanova · Published: October 12, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Research cluster: Memory & Forgetting · Written by Artificial Sapiens
Learning a person's name means creating a reliable link between the sound of a name, the person it identifies, and the cues that will later bring that name back to mind. The strongest practical approach is to hear the name accurately, connect it to meaningful information, retrieve it from memory rather than merely repeating it, and revisit it after some time has passed. Studies directly testing face–name learning support retrieval practice, meaningful encoding, and distributed practice; they do not establish a universal trick that guarantees perfect recall.
For example, after meeting someone named Maya, listen to how Maya says her name, confirm it if necessary, connect Maya with a specific conversation or shared context, and then try to recall “Maya” without being prompted. Check the answer and revisit it later. That sequence is more useful than hoping that hearing a name once will make it stick. The details of how and when to practice matter, and there are important differences between evidence about laboratory face–name pairs and real social encounters.
How to remember names: a practical, evidence-informed sequence
When meeting someone, give the introduction your attention and listen to the complete name. If you miss it, ask for it again immediately. Repeat the name once naturally to confirm that you heard it correctly. Build one meaningful connection between the person and the name: their introduction, their role in the conversation, a shared experience, or a distinctive piece of relevant information. A moment later, recall the name silently before checking it; use it naturally if it fits the conversation. After the encounter, try to retrieve the name again, ideally with the person's face or context as the cue. Revisit it on a later occasion and correct errors promptly.
This is a flexible sequence, not a validated seven-step clinical protocol. Its strongest components are supported by direct experiments on face–name learning, real-world proper-name studies, and the wider retrieval-practice literature. Asking for a spelling or a pronunciation is a practical way to improve accurate encoding and show respect; researchers have not isolated every such conversational behavior as an independently effective memory intervention.
Why remembering names is surprisingly difficult
A face and a name are different pieces of information
Recognizing a familiar face is not equivalent to producing its owner's name. You may identify a person, know where you met them, remember their occupation and still fail to retrieve the particular sound pattern of the name. Face recognition, access to biographical information and retrieval of a proper name involve partly separable cognitive operations. Forming a new face–name link also requires remembering the association between two items rather than either item alone.
This distinction is visible in experimental work. In studies of learning names versus occupations, proper names were especially challenging compared with other associated personal information. A functional MRI study of new face–name encoding implicated a distributed network that included the hippocampal system, a region important for forming new associations. These results support an associative-memory account without implying that the hippocampus acts alone or that one brain scan can tell an individual why a name was forgotten.
Names are often arbitrary labels
A person's occupation or a descriptive fact may offer a meaningful clue. A name such as Jordan, by itself, usually gives little reliable information about the individual. Even a familiar name becomes a new memory problem when attached to an unfamiliar face. Researchers studying proper names have emphasized the weak semantic connections that may accompany arbitrary labels. Yet “names have no meaning” is too sweeping: names carry language, family history, cultural significance, and sometimes meaningful associations that can support remembering.
A useful distinction follows. Learning what the name means or how it is pronounced may enrich its representation; remembering which person it belongs to requires binding that representation to the individual. You need both an accessible name and an effective cue that connects it to this person.
Attention at the moment of introduction matters
Introductions are cognitively busy. You may be preparing your own response, interpreting social cues, worrying about a first impression, or hearing several people speak at once. If the name receives little processing, there is little information available for later retrieval. Deliberate attention is therefore a plausible and low-cost starting point. It does not imply that every forgotten name resulted from poor listening: even deliberately learned face–name associations are fallible.
A person who remembers a conversation yet forgets the name may have encoded the dialogue's meaning more deeply than the sound of the proper name. The practical solution is to make the name an explicit target of learning while maintaining a natural conversation.
Similar faces and overlapping associations complicate retrieval
Distinctiveness can help identify which individual goes with which label. Research using systematically varied faces found that greater similarity among learned faces could reduce face–name recall and increase confusions. However, a popular explanation claims that forgetting names is mainly caused by other names blocking access. Three experiments manipulating several potential forms of interference did not find the predicted interference effects. Name-learning difficulty has several contributors; competition from other names is not a sufficient general explanation.
What direct experiments actually show
Two particularly relevant research programs tested name learning itself instead of assuming that results from general memory tasks automatically apply to social introductions. Carpenter and DeLosh's four experiments examined retention of face–name pairs after testing and restudying under different schedules. Retrieval tests generally outperformed additional studying, and spacing practice outperformed massed learning. Uniformly spaced and expanding test schedules were not consistently distinguishable in their final memory outcomes.
Morris and colleagues tested expanding retrieval practice, semantic associations, and imagery. Their laboratory comparisons favored successful retrieval and meaningful association under the tested conditions. One study also asked participants to remember people met at a party. Retrieval practice improved later name recall in that real social situation, while an imagery mnemonic did not outperform ordinary instructions in that experiment. Laboratory percentage improvements are relative effects under particular test conditions, not promises of equivalent performance in a workplace, classroom, or family gathering.
These studies are important because they identify mechanisms that can be tested and practiced. Their limitations matter too: tasks differ in how long names are presented, whether faces are photographed or met in person, how many people are learned, when memory is tested, and whether feedback is available. A technique's effectiveness for photographs presented repeatedly in a controlled setting may change when you meet someone briefly in noise or without a visual cue.
Step 1: Hear the name correctly and give it a moment of attention
During an introduction, briefly prioritize the other person's name. Let them finish speaking, and listen for the sounds instead of rehearsing your next question. When the name is unfamiliar, asking “Could you say your name once more?” is usually more reliable than guessing. If pronunciation matters, say “I want to get your name right. How do you pronounce it?” You can repeat it once in response to confirm it.
The goal is accurate encoding. A misheard label may be memorable but incorrect, and later rehearsal can strengthen the wrong label. Paying attention also includes avoiding premature assumptions about how a name is pronounced, spelled, or culturally associated. Ask the person rather than relying on stereotypes.
Saying the name aloud may introduce another encoding or retrieval event, but rote repetition and retrieval should be distinguished. Echoing the sound while someone is still speaking is a form of immediate rehearsal. Producing the name a minute later, without hearing or seeing it, is a test of recall. Research directly supports repeated successful retrieval more strongly than a fixed rule to say every new name three times.
Step 2: Make a meaningful link between the name and the person
An association gives retrieval something to work with. Instead of treating “Maya” as an isolated string of letters, connect it to a specific meeting: “Maya, the engineer who described the river restoration project.” You may use a shared activity, the subject of the conversation, an accurate pronunciation cue, or a link to someone with the same name. What matters is that the connection is distinctive enough to point back to the individual.
A study of name and face learning in younger and older adults found that semantic processing of names produced better name recall and recognition than shallower physical or phonemic processing under its conditions. Meaningful processing can make information more retrievable, although the best way to encode a face may differ from the best way to encode a name. Making an association is useful precisely because it creates a cue tailored to the information you want to recall.
Avoid associations that distort a person's identity or depend on assumptions about appearance, ethnicity, gender, or disability. A respectful mnemonic can be based on what the person actually shared. A private visual image is optional, and its effectiveness depends on whether you can retrieve it and map it back to the correct name.
A worked example
Suppose you meet Dr. Elena Park at a community event and discuss public gardens. First, confirm “Elena Park.” Next, make a compact connection: “Elena Park — the researcher I spoke with about public gardens.” Later, imagine seeing her face at the event and ask yourself, “What was her name?” If “Elena Park” comes to mind, you have practiced the desired response. If you cannot retrieve it, check a note or introduction record and try again later.
This example illustrates the method; it is not a separate tested mnemonic protocol. The conversation fact is a cue, the face is another cue, and the name is the target. Combining cues may help you recover the association when one clue alone is insufficient.
Step 3: Practice recalling the name, not merely rereading it
Retrieval practice means trying to produce a learned answer from memory. For a name, the most relevant test is to look at or imagine the person and attempt to say the correct name before seeing or hearing it. If you always look at the name first, you are mainly practicing recognition or restudy. Both can provide information, but they are different activities.
A broad meta-analysis of testing versus restudy supports the benefit of active retrieval for later retention in many learning settings. More directly, face–name experiments found improved name retention following testing. The mechanism is usually described in terms of strengthening future accessibility through retrieval, though the precise explanatory framework remains debated.
Make the attempt brief. Think “Who was the person I met by the registration table?” and wait for the name. If you can retrieve it, confirm the answer and move on. If you cannot, reveal the correct name rather than confidently rehearsing a guess. An unsuccessful attempt can reveal a weakness; accurate feedback supplies the missing information.
Why feedback matters
The value of repeated tests depends partly on whether the learner can recover the correct answer. In experiments with middle-aged and older adults learning face–name pairs, repeated testing helped both groups when feedback was given, while without feedback the older group showed a different pattern. This finding argues against interpreting “test yourself” as “keep guessing without checking.” When uncertainty is high, a successful study opportunity followed by retrieval with feedback may be the better starting point.
Step 4: Space your reviews across time
Trying to remember the same name several times consecutively may feel fluent. That feeling does not guarantee retention tomorrow. Distributed practice creates later opportunities to reconstruct the answer after some forgetting has occurred. The broader quantitative review of distributed practice found systematic relationships among spacing intervals, retention intervals, and later memory; no universal interval works best for every material or retention goal.
For a new acquaintance, an illustrative schedule is to attempt recall during the conversation, shortly after the meeting, later that day, and on a subsequent day when you expect to meet again. These are practical examples, not experimentally established ideal delays for all names. If the name is easy and likely to be used again, fewer reviews may be sufficient. If it is unfamiliar or particularly important, add retrieval opportunities over a longer period.
Direct name-learning studies support combining spacing with testing. They also caution against claims that an expanding schedule must always beat evenly spaced attempts: the experiments did not consistently demonstrate that advantage. The defensible principle is distributed, accurate retrieval matched to when you need the name.
Step 5: Reconnect the name with a realistic retrieval cue
Many memory techniques are practiced with written lists, but life presents a face, a voice, a video tile, a room, or a familiar setting. Practice with the cue you will actually encounter. If you will meet someone in person, recall the name while thinking of their face and the relevant context. If you know a colleague through video meetings, connect the name to their current profile and voice, while allowing for changes in lighting, hairstyles, photographs, and display names.
When a name becomes accessible only after hearing a coworker say it, you may have good recognition with weaker independent recall. Recreate the person-to-name direction: face or situation first, correct name second. Recognition can confirm the answer, but the specific target is unaided retrieval.
A well-formed association should remain flexible. “The person who sat near the window” may fail at the next event when the seating changes. Use a stable person-specific detail along with the original context. Multiple useful cues can support later retrieval, but collecting a long list of unrelated facts is unnecessary.
How many repetitions does it take to remember a name?
There is no research-supported number of repetitions that makes every person's name permanently memorable. Difficulty varies with familiarity, pronunciation, exposure, cue quality, delay, context, individual differences, and whether previous attempts were correct. Ten mechanical repetitions in a row may teach less durable recall than a smaller number of attempts distributed over time.
For practical purposes, aim for one accurate initial encoding, at least one genuine unaided recall, and subsequent review if the name matters. Continue until you can retrieve it in the intended situation rather than counting how many times you have said it. This reflects the evidence for retrieval and spacing without turning research into a magical numerical rule.
Remembering several names at a meeting, class, or conference
When meeting many people, the principal problem becomes managing multiple individual associations. Learn each name as it is introduced instead of postponing every attempt until the end. Pair a name with the person's own introduction or a relevant discussion point. After a small group has introduced itself, mentally reconstruct each name from the corresponding person or seat, then correct uncertainties while accurate information is available.
At a networking event, a simple follow-up note can preserve the correct spelling, the subject discussed, and any agreed next step. For example: “Elena Park — local garden restoration — send study link.” When permissible, a digital contact record can act as an external cue at the next meeting. The note is especially useful if the event was busy or if future contact matters more than unaided recall in every circumstance.
In a class, use a roster or seating chart when available, update it as seats change, and deliberately test yourself on the names you already know. Students' preferred names and pronunciations should be obtained from them and corrected promptly. In a large organization, learn names as an ongoing process rather than treating a single orientation session as a final exam.
Avoid the illusion of learning from name tags
A name tag provides a correct answer; it does not prove you can produce that answer once the tag is removed. When appropriate, look away and try to retrieve the name before consulting the tag again. The same principle applies to online directories. A contact list is valuable as a record, but unaided recall requires a different action.
Remembering names during video meetings and remote work
Virtual meetings provide useful cues and create distinctive obstacles. Participants may speak briefly, cameras may be off, and the display may already show their names. When possible, listen to each introduction and connect the spoken name with an actual contribution: “Ari — asked about accessibility in the product review.” Afterwards, use the name without the on-screen label as a retrieval test.
Keep spelling and pronunciation accurate. If a displayed name differs from what the person uses, ask them which name they prefer. Avoid making identity assumptions from profile photographs or accent. When cameras are off, voice and conversational context may be more relevant cues than an imagined face. Research on face–name pairing does not automatically establish the effectiveness of every strategy for remote audio-only introductions; adapt the general principles to the available cues.
Remembering unfamiliar, multilingual, and culturally diverse names
An unfamiliar name may demand additional learning because its sound pattern and spelling are new to you. Ask for pronunciation, listen without interrupting, repeat it carefully when appropriate, and save the correct written form if permitted. A phonetic hint may help as a private temporary cue, but the person's own pronunciation remains the reference.
Names are personal, and memory strategies must respect that. Do not replace someone's preferred name with an easier nickname without their agreement. Avoid linking a name to an invented nationality or stereotype. Learning the accurate form is part of the task, and a respectful correction after an error is preferable to repeated misnaming.
If you meet people with similar names, build distinct person-specific associations. If you meet the same person under different names or titles, establish which form they prefer in each context and avoid presuming that the same label always applies.
Are funny images and face–name mnemonics effective?
Imagery can work as an encoding aid, particularly when it creates a memorable and retrievable connection. In memory research, visual imagery and associative mnemonics have sometimes improved performance. A meta-analysis of the method of loci, for example, found benefits for studied recall tasks while noting important design limitations. A more recent systematic review also evaluated the method's effects and rated much of the underlying evidence low or very low quality.
The method of loci is a procedure for associating information with imagined locations in an organized route. It is not automatically the best strategy for matching a person's face with their proper name. Indeed, the real-life party experiment reported by Morris and colleagues found a retrieval-practice advantage but did not demonstrate an advantage for the imagery mnemonic tested. Results for memorizing a list of words should not be presented as proof that vivid or bizarre visualizations will reliably help every social name-learning task.
If images are intuitive for you, try an unobtrusive association and later test actual recall. If the image is cumbersome, distracting, inaccurate, or difficult to map back to the person's name, a factual conversation-based link may be more effective. The goal is retrievability, not theatrical cleverness.
What happens in the brain when you learn a name?
Learning someone's name combines perceptual analysis, language processing, associative encoding, and later retrieval. Visual systems help distinguish faces; language-related processes represent speech sounds and proper names; hippocampal and related medial temporal systems contribute to binding newly encountered information. Later retrieval draws on overlapping networks and cues. Functional imaging supports involvement of this network but does not reduce face–name learning to one anatomical location.
The fMRI investigation of encoding novel face–name associations is informative as an early demonstration of neural systems recruited by this task. Its findings concern patterns of activation during a particular experimental paradigm. They do not establish that imagining a certain shape or repeating a name triggers a guaranteed brain change. Practical technique recommendations are better grounded in behavioral studies showing what people can actually remember later.
Why you can recognize someone but cannot remember their name
This familiar experience reflects a mismatch between what is available and what you can retrieve. Recognizing someone's face may be successful even when the face-to-name association is weak or the proper name is temporarily inaccessible. You may remember a workplace, a conversation, or the person's role without producing the specific word.
Try another legitimate cue: the setting where you met, the topic you discussed, or a mutual connection. Give retrieval a short opportunity; if the name remains unavailable, ask politely or check an accurate record. Once you recover it, later retrieve it again without immediately looking at the answer. A single forgotten name does not imply that the entire encounter has vanished from memory.
Forgetting names with age: what changes and what does not
Many adults notice that learning unfamiliar names becomes less effortless with age. Research documents age-related differences in the ability to remember face–name associations, but the size and interpretation of those differences depend on task conditions. Some experiments support an age-related difficulty binding a name to a face; other work shows that stimulus complexity, intentional learning, and access to feedback can alter results. Studies of face–name memory therefore should not be treated as a single fixed measure of “memory capacity.”
In a study of intentional and incidental face–name learning, the pattern of age differences varied with the encoding instructions. Experiments using changes in the salience and variability of faces similarly suggest that task materials can change age-related effects. For practice, this means that explicit attention, meaningful links, and feedback can be worth testing personally, with realistic expectations.
Ordinary occasional name forgetting differs from significant changes that disrupt everyday functioning. The US National Institute on Aging explains that intermittent forgetfulness can accompany aging, while persistent or worsening memory difficulties that affect daily activities deserve medical evaluation. Trouble recalling a person's name in isolation is not a dementia diagnosis, a screening result, or a reliable way to distinguish clinical conditions.
Social anxiety, fatigue, distraction, and other contextual factors
When an introduction occurs under pressure, limited attention and competing demands may make encoding more difficult. Anxiety, low sleep, stress, hearing difficulties, unfamiliar language, or rapid presentation can make a particular interaction more demanding. These are possible contributing factors, not diagnoses derived from a single memory lapse. The National Institute on Aging's clinical education page describes multiple potentially relevant contributors to memory problems.
If you often lose names in loud environments, try reducing background noise and ensuring that you actually heard the name. If you were concentrating on speaking, deliberately shift attention during the introduction. If social pressure makes you feel rushed, asking for repetition can provide both accurate information and a moment for encoding. If a broad change in memory, hearing, or daily functioning concerns you, discuss it with an appropriate health professional rather than trying to infer a condition from a list of memory tips.
Can memory apps, games, or courses make you better at names?
A name-learning tool can make the desired practice easier by pairing accurate names with photographs or appropriate contextual cues, providing feedback, and scheduling later reviews. Its benefit would be plausible because it supports the same operations studied in retrieval and spacing experiments. Whether a particular commercial app works as advertised depends on its design, the quality of the evidence, and whether users improve on real-world names outside the app.
Research on cognitive training distinguishes improvement at the practiced task, near transfer to closely related tasks, far transfer to different abilities, and demonstrable improvement in ordinary functioning. A systematic review and meta-analysis of commercially available brain-training programs reported small near-transfer effects but much more limited evidence for objective everyday far transfer. Training on a name quiz does not automatically mean better memory across all domains, and brain-game scores are not clinical assessments.
You can test a method pragmatically: compare how well you remember newly met people after several days, using accurate records to check your answers. Do not base the evaluation on the app's own scores alone. There is no solid basis to promise universal intelligence enhancement, prevention of neurodegenerative disease, or guaranteed name recall from a mnemonic subscription.
How to recover gracefully when you forget a name
When you cannot retrieve a name during conversation, a direct and respectful request works: “I'm sorry, would you remind me of your name?” If you realize you have been using an incorrect name, acknowledge the correction and use the preferred form. Concealing uncertainty with an invented name risks more embarrassment and reduces the opportunity to learn the accurate information.
Afterward, do one deliberate retrieval attempt and check the result. Update a contact note if needed. Avoid repeatedly saying the name in an unnatural way or turning the conversation into a memory demonstration. Remembering names is a relational skill that benefits from the usual rules of courtesy and privacy as much as from study techniques.
Common myths about remembering names
“Repeating a name three times makes it stick.”
A fixed number of immediate repetitions has no established guarantee. Hearing or saying the answer repeatedly is different from reconstructing it after a delay. Experiments directly studying names favor testing and spaced practice over additional massed study under their conditions.
“A spectacular mental image is the best method for everyone.”
Images can be useful mnemonic cues. Their superiority for all face–name learning has not been established, and direct social name-learning research found no advantage for one tested imagery procedure in a party setting. Select the cue that makes the correct association accessible.
“If I know the face, I must have stored the name perfectly.”
Familiarity with a face and the ability to retrieve a name are different outcomes. Face–name association research shows why identifying the person can be easier than producing the correct proper name. A lapse may reflect weak initial encoding or retrieval difficulty; the situation alone does not identify a unique cause.
“Forgetting names proves that my memory is failing.”
Ordinary forgetfulness occurs across adulthood. Clinical interpretation depends on the pattern, progression, associated symptoms and impact on daily functioning. Refer to the National Institute on Aging's guidance for the distinction between common lapses and changes warranting medical evaluation.
“Brain games guarantee better social memory.”
Success on trained tasks often exceeds evidence for transfer to unrelated everyday abilities. Training reviews emphasize that near and far transfer must be evaluated separately. The useful question is whether the training improves recall of actual names over time, not whether it raises a game score.
Frequently asked questions
What is the fastest way to remember a name you just heard?
First hear it correctly; ask again if necessary. Connect it to something distinctive the person actually said, and try to retrieve it from memory a little later. Brief, accurate retrieval paired with later review reflects the strongest directly relevant findings. There is no single trick that guarantees immediate retention.
Should I say a person's name out loud when we meet?
It can be natural and helpful to repeat it once to confirm pronunciation. The research does not establish a necessary number of spoken repetitions. The more important distinction is between echoing a name while it is available and recalling it later without an immediate prompt.
How can I remember names and faces together?
Practice the direction you need: encounter the person's face or a faithful contextual cue, then produce the correct name. Add a meaningful association and provide feedback when you are unsure. Research specifically investigating face–name pairs supports retrieval and distributed practice.
What if I remember the face but draw a blank on the name?
Use context to search memory briefly, then ask or check an accurate record. This experience is common because recognition and name retrieval have partly different requirements. Relearning the correct answer and retrieving it again later may make it easier next time.
Does writing down names help memory?
Accurate notes can preserve the name and helpful context for future use. A note serves as an external memory aid; whether it improves unaided recall depends on how you use it. Cover the name and test yourself when appropriate. Protect other people's information and follow workplace or professional privacy rules.
Do name mnemonics work for unusual or foreign names?
They may, particularly if they help preserve an accurate sound pattern and connect it to the correct person. Ask for the preferred pronunciation instead of substituting an easier label. Mnemonic imagery, spelling clues, and semantic links are options rather than guarantees, and evidence is stronger for some procedures and tasks than others.
Can I remember everyone's name at a large event?
It is reasonable to expect imperfect performance as the number of new associations grows. Learn names in manageable batches, use specific context, check mistakes early, and review people you are likely to meet again. Written records can supplement unaided memory without turning normal lapses into a failure.
Is remembering someone's name a sign of high intelligence?
Name recall depends on several cognitive operations and the conditions in which learning occurs. One good or bad performance episode does not measure general intelligence. Practice effects on a particular memory task must be distinguished from broad cognitive ability.
Should I review names the next day?
When a future encounter matters, a delayed recall attempt can be useful. The optimal spacing interval depends on the intended retention duration and other conditions; an exact next-day prescription has not been validated for every social name-learning task. Use later reviews to check whether the association remains accessible.
Are memory palaces better than repetition for names?
The method of loci is supported for certain recall tasks, but its superiority for everyday face–name learning is unproven. For names, direct research supports retrieval practice, meaningful associations, and spacing. A memory palace may be worthwhile if you can efficiently connect each location to the correct person.
Does getting older mean I will stop learning new names?
No. Age-related averages do not determine an individual's ability to learn a name. Conditions, feedback, practice, health factors and the complexity of the material affect outcomes. Studies also show that older adults can benefit from structured learning and corrective feedback, although gains vary.
When should I seek medical advice about forgetting names?
Consider evaluation if memory changes are persistent or worsening, extend beyond names, or interfere with everyday functioning, or if you or people close to you are concerned. A clinician can consider relevant history, medicines, hearing, sleep, mood, and other explanations. An online name-recall score is not a diagnosis.
Putting the evidence to work
An effective name-learning practice has three goals: accurately identify the label, create a meaningful person-specific connection, and practice bringing the right answer back under conditions resembling the next encounter. Testing and spacing have stronger direct support than a fixed count of repetitions. Meaningful association may help, while imagery works differently across tasks and people. Use feedback whenever a guess is uncertain.
Start with the next two or three introductions rather than attempting an elaborate memorization system. Keep the names accurate, build simple respectful cues, and test recall after a delay. The relevant outcome is whether you can recognize the person and supply their preferred name when you meet again.
Related Articles
For the general mechanisms behind learning and recalling information, read Human Memory: Types, Processes, and How It Works. For a broader evidence-based overview of remembering strategies, see How to Improve Memory: Evidence-Based Strategies That Help. Our focused guides to Retrieval Practice and Spaced Repetition explain the underlying effects in more detail.
References
Bender, A. R., Naveh-Benjamin, M., Amann, K., & Raz, N. (2017). The role of stimulus complexity and salience in memory for face–name associations in healthy adults: Friend or foe? Psychology and Aging, 32(5), 489–505. https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000185
Carpenter, S. K., & DeLosh, E. L. (2005). Application of the testing and spacing effects to name learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(5), 619–636. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1101
Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 354–380. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.354
James, L. E., Fogler, K. A., & Tauber, S. K. (2008). Recognition memory measures yield disproportionate effects of aging on learning face–name associations. Psychology and Aging, 23(3), 657–664. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013008
James, L. E., Tauber, S. K., McMahan, E. A., Oberle, S., Martinez, A. P., & Fogler, K. A. (2012). Searching for interference effects in learning new face–name associations. Memory, 20(2), 155–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2011.649290
Morris, P. E., Fritz, C. O., Jackson, L., Nichol, E., & Roberts, E. (2005). Strategies for learning proper names: Expanding retrieval practice, meaning and imagery. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(6), 779–798. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1115
National Institute on Aging. (n.d.). Memory problems, forgetfulness, and aging. National Institutes of Health. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/memory-loss-and-forgetfulness/memory-forgetfulness-and-aging-whats-normal-and-whats-not
Naveh-Benjamin, M., Shing, Y. L., Kilb, A., Werkle-Bergner, M., Lindenberger, U., & Li, S.-C. (2009). Adult age differences in memory for name–face associations: The effects of intentional and incidental learning. Memory, 17(2), 220–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210802222183
Nguyen, L., Murphy, K., & Andrews, G. (2022). A game a day keeps cognitive decline away? A systematic review and meta-analysis of commercially-available brain training programs in healthy and cognitively impaired older adults. Neuropsychology Review, 32, 601–630. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-021-09515-2
Ondřej, J. (2025). The method of loci in the context of psychological research: A systematic review and meta-analysis. British Journal of Psychology, 116(4), 930–986. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12799
Pantelis, P. C., Van Vugt, M. K., Sekuler, R., Wilson, H. R., & Kahana, M. J. (2008). Why are some people’s names easier to learn than others? The effects of face similarity on memory for face–name associations. Memory & Cognition, 36(6), 1182–1195. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.36.6.1182
Rowland, C. A. (2014). The effect of testing versus restudy on retention: A meta-analytic review of the testing effect. Psychological Bulletin, 140(6), 1432–1463. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037559
Sperling, R. A., Bates, J. F., Cocchiarella, A. J., Schacter, D. L., Rosen, B. R., & Albert, M. S. (2001). Encoding novel face–name associations: A functional MRI study. Human Brain Mapping, 14(3), 129–139. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.1047
Troyer, A. K., Häfliger, A., Cadieux, M. J., & Craik, F. I. M. (2006). Name and face learning in older adults: Effects of level of processing, self-generation, and intention to learn. Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 61(2), P67–P74. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/61.2.p67
Tse, C.-S., Balota, D. A., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2010). The benefits and costs of repeated testing on the learning of face–name pairs in healthy older adults. Psychology and Aging, 25(4), 833–845. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019933
Twomey, C., & Kroneisen, M. (2021). The effectiveness of the loci method as a mnemonic device: Meta-analysis. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 74(8), 1317–1326. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747021821993457