Search

In two experiments with categorized lists, we asked whether the testing effect in free recall is related to enhancements in organizational processing. During a first phase in Experiment 1, subjects studied one list over eight consecutive trials, they studied another list six times while taking two interspersed recall tests, and they learned a third list in four alternating study and test trials. On a test 2 days later, recall was directly related to the number of tests and inversely related to the number of study trials. In addition, increased testing enhanced both the number of categories accessed and the number of items recalled from within those categories. One measure of organization also increased with the number of tests. In a second experiment, different groups of subjects studied a list either once or twice before a final criterial test, or they studied the list once and took an initial recall test before the final test. Prior testing again enhanced recall, relative to studying on the final test a day later, and also improved category clustering. The results suggest that the benefit of testing in free recall learning arises because testing creates retrieval schemas that guide recall. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For 120 years, cognitive psychologists have sought general laws of learning and memory. In this review I conclude that none has stood the test of time. No empirical law withstands manipulation across the four sets of factors that Jenkins (1979) identified as critical to memory experiments: types of subjects, kinds of events to be remembered, manipulation of encoding conditions, and variations in test conditions. Another factor affecting many phenomena is whether a manipulation of conditions occurs in randomized, within-subjects designs rather than between-subjects (or within-subject, blocked) designs. The fact that simple laws do not hold reveals the complex, interactive nature of memory phenomena. Nonetheless, the science of memory is robust, with most findings easily replicated under the same conditions as originally used, but when other variables are manipulated, effects may disappear or reverse. These same points are probably true of psychological research in most, if not all, domains. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Expanding retrieval practice (T. K. Landauer & R. A. Bjork, 1978) is regarded as a superior technique for promoting long-term retention relative to equally spaced retrieval practice. In Experiments I and 2, the authors found that expanding retrieval practice of vocabulary word pairs produced short-term benefits 10 mm after learning, conceptually replicating Landauer and Bjork's results. However, equally spaced retrieval produced superior retention 2 days later. This pattern occurred both with and without feedback after test trials. In Experiment 3, the 1st test occurred immediately or after a brief delay, and repeated tests were expanding or equally spaced. Delaying the first test improved long-term retention, regardless of how the repeated tests were spaced. The important factor for promoting long-term retention is delaying initial retrieval to make it more difficult, as is done in equally spaced retrieval but not in expanding retrieval. Expanding the interval between repeated tests had little effect on long-term retention in 3 experiments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the present study, subjects studied lists of words across four experimental conditions: whether (or not) subjects received initial testing for these lists and whether (or not) they were made aware of an upcoming final free-recall test. Initial testing enhanced final-test performance; however, subjects benefited more from initial testing when they also knew they would need to remember the information for a later test. The data suggest that holding an expectation of the final test encouraged the continued processing of study materials following an initial test, affecting the accessibility of these materials at the time of final recall. The results clearly illustrate how an expectation of a cumulative test might influence long-term retention, which may have important implications for educational practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A powerful way of improving one's memory for material is to be tested on that material. Tests enhance later retention more than additional study of the material, even when tests are given without feedback. This surprising phenomenon is called the testing effect, and although it has been studied by cognitive psychologists sporadically over the years, today there is a renewed effort to learn why testing is effective and to apply testing in educational settings. In this article, we selectively review laboratory studies that reveal the power of testing in improving retention and then turn to studies that demonstrate the basic effects in educational settings. We also consider the related concepts of dynamic testing and formative assessment as other means of using tests to improve learning. Finally, we consider some negative consequences of testing that may occur in certain circumstances, though these negative effects are often small and do not cancel out the large positive effects of testing. Frequent testing in the classroom may boost educational achievement at all levels of education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Taking a memory test not only assesses what one knows, but also enhances later retention, a phenomenon known as the testing effect. We studied this effect with educationally relevant materials and investigated whether testing facilitates learning only because tests offer an opportunity to restudy material. In two experiments, students studied prose passages and took one or three immediate free-recall tests, without feedback, or restudied the material the same number of times as the students who received tests. Students then took a final retention test 5 min, 2 days, or 1 week later. When the final test was given after 5 min, repeated studying improved recall relative to repeated testing. However, on the delayed tests, prior testing produced substantially greater retention than studying, even though repeated studying increased students' confidence in their ability to remember the material. Testing is a powerful means of improving learning, not just assessing it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Learning is often considered complete when a student can produce the correct answer to a question. In our research, students in one condition learned foreign language vocabulary words in the standard paradigm of repeated study-test trials. In three other conditions, once a student had correctly produced the vocabulary item, it was repeatedly studied but dropped from further testing, repeatedly tested but dropped from further study, or dropped from both study and test. Repeated studying after learning had no effect on delayed recall, but repeated testing produced a large positive effect. In addition, students' predictions of their performance were uncorrelated with actual performance. The results demonstrate the critical rote of retrieval practice in consolidating learning and show that even university students seem unaware of this fact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

People’s knowledge about the world comes from many sources, including fictional ones such as movies and novels. In three experiments, we investigated how people learn and integrate information from fictional sources with their general world knowledge. Subjects read a series of short stories that contained information about the real world. After a short delay, all participants took a general knowledge test. Subjects did indeed use information from the stories to answer general knowledge questions. Prior reading of facts boosted participants’ abilities to produce both obscure and better-known facts, and the effect held for both correct and incorrect facts (misinformation). Repeated reading of the stories increased the effect. After a delay of one week, effects of story exposure were strongest for items that also had been tested in the first session. Subjects were aware of using story information, but interestingly, story exposure also increased belief that the facts had been known prior to the experiment, even for misinformation answers that were rarely produced without story reading. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Typically, teachers use tests to evaluate students' knowledge acquisition. In a novel experimental study, we examined whether low-stakes testing (quizzing) can be used to foster students' learning of course content in 8th grade science classes. Students received multiple-choice quizzes (with feedback); in the quizzes, some target content that would be included on the class summative assessments was tested, and some of the target content was not tested. In Experiment 1, three quizzes on the content were spaced across the coverage of a unit. Quizzing produced significant learning benefits, with between 13% and 25% gains in performance on summative unit examinations. In Experiments 2a and 2b, we manipulated the placement of the quizzing, with students being quizzed on some content prior to the lecture, quizzed on some immediately after the lecture, and quizzed on some as a review prior to the unit exam. Review quizzing produced the greatest increases in exam performance, and these increases were only slightly augmented when the items had appeared on previous quizzes. The benefits of quizzing (relative to not quizzing) persisted on cumulative semester and end-of-year exams. We suggest that the present effects reflect benefits accruing to retrieval practice, benefits that are well established in the basic literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Popular history films sometimes contain major historical inaccuracies. Two experiments investigated how watching such films influences people's ability to remember associated texts. Subjects watched film clips and studied texts about various historical topics. Whereas the texts contained only correct information, the film clips contained both correct information (consistent with the text) and misinformation (contradicted by the text). Before watching each clip, subjects received a specific warning, a general warning, or no warning about the misinformation. One week later, they returned for a cued-recall test about the texts. Watching a film clip increased correct recall of consistent information relative to recall of the same information when subjects did not see the clip. However, when the information in the film contradicted the text, subjects often (falsely) recalled misinformation from the film. The specific warning substantially reduced this misinformation effect. Teachers should use popular history films with caution and should warn students about major inaccuracies in the films. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]