These comments take up the major issues raised in Eysenck's (1978) critique of Craik & Lockhart (1972): The problem of circularity in the definition of ‘depth’, the distinction between qualitative and quantitative differences in encoding, and the relationship between the concepts of depth, strength and elaboration. It is claimed that despite certain weaknesses, the original formulation possesses considerable heuristic value.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lockhart et al. (1978) studied this question.