A dual memory theory of the testing effect

A new theoretical framework for the testing effect—the finding that retrieval practice is usually more effective for learning than are other strategies—is proposed, the empirically supported tenet of which is that separate memories form as a consequence of study and test events. A simplest case quantitative model is derived from that framework for the case of cued recall. With no free parameters, that model predicts both proportion correct in the test condition and the magnitude of the testing effect across 10 experiments conducted in our laboratory, experiments that varied with respect to material type, retention interval, and performance in the restudy condition. The model also provides the first quantitative accounts of (a) the testing effect as a function of performance in the restudy condition, (b) the upper bound magnitude of the testing effect, (c) the effect of correct answer feedback, (d) the testing effect as a function of retention interval for the cases of feedback and no feedback, and (e) the effect of prior learning method on subsequent learning through testing. Candidate accounts of several other core phenomena in the literature, including test-potentiated learning, recognition versus cued recall training effects, cued versus free recall final test effects, and other select transfer effects, are also proposed. Future prospects and relations to other theories are discussed.     

Test-potentiated learning of motor sequences

We investigated effects of retrieving body movements from memory on subsequent re-encoding of these movements (i.e., test-potentiated learning). In Experiment 1, participants first learned to perform 12 sequential finger movements as responses to letter stimuli. Eight of these movements then had to be recalled in response to their stimuli (initial test). Subsequently, learning trials were repeated for four of the previously to-be-retrieved movements as well as the previously not-to-be-retrieved movements. Restudy benefited from prior retrieval. In a final test, again requiring motoric recall in response to letter stimuli, performance was better for restudied items that were previously cued for retrieval as compared to items that had been restudied without prior retrieval. However, no such indirect testing benefit occurred when initial and final testing formats were incongruent, that is, when participants had to recall the stimuli in response to movements as cues at the final test. In Experiment 2, we replicated the finding of test-potentiated learning with a different design, manipulating initial-testing status between participants.     

Putting action memory to the test: testing affects subsequent restudy but not long-term forgetting of action events

Testing memory typically enhances subsequent re-encoding of information (“indirect” testing effect) and, as compared to restudy, it also benefits later long-term retention (“direct” testing effect). We investigated the effect of testing on subsequent restudy and 1-week retention of action events (e.g. “water the plant”). In addition, we investigated if the type of recall practice (noun-cued vs. verb-cued) moderates these testing benefits. The results showed an indirect testing effect that increased following noun-cued recall of verbs as compared to verb-cued recall of nouns. In contrast, a direct testing effect on the forgetting rate of performed actions was not reliably observed, neither for noun- nor verb-cued recall. Thus, to the extent that this study successfully dissociated direct and indirect testing-based enhancements, they seem to be differentially effective for performed actions, and may rely on partially different mechanisms.     

Costs and benefits of dropout schedules of test–restudy practice: Implications for student learning

Almost all previous studies examining the benefits of testing for promoting student learning have used fixed schedules of practice. However, students more often report utilizing a dropout schedule of practice, in which items are dropped from practice once they are known. Two experiments investigated the costs and benefits of utilizing a dropout schedule of test–restudy practice. Participants learned Swahili–English paired associates using a dropout schedule or a fixed schedule. In the dropout schedule, items received test–restudy practice until each item was correctly recalled once. In the fixed schedule, all items received three tests–restudy practice trials regardless of whether they were correctly recalled, as in previous research. Experiment 2 also included a second learning session. In both experiments, a final cued recall test was administered several days later. Results indicated that the benefits of the dropout schedule (fewer practice trials used overall and all items correctly recalled once during practice) need to be considered in light of the costs (lower levels of final test performance). Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The influence of intentional versus incidental retrieval practices on the role of recollection in test-enhanced learning

A testing effect occurs when taking a test leads to more durable memory for tested materials, relative to restudying them during the same period of time. In the current study, we examined whether incidental and intentional restudy/testing practice modes during a practice phase would modulate the contribution of recollection-based and familiarity-based retrieval in a final recognition test. Both practice strategy (restudy versus testing) and practice mode (incidental vs. intentional) were manipulated between participants (N = 160). The restudy and testing groups performed a semantic rating task and a word fragment completion task, respectively, in the incidental condition or in the intentional condition. Only those participants in the intentional condition were instructed to recall or restudy the targets. All participants went through two study–practice cycles that involved two different sets of targets. After the second cycle, participants performed a list-discrimination recognition test that could assess the contributions of recollection-based and familiarity-based retrieval on test-enhanced learning. The testing effect occurred in the intentional condition, but not in the incidental condition. Relative to intentional restudy, intentional testing boosted recollection, but not familiarity, demonstrating the role of recollection in test-enhanced learning.     

学习方式的变革:提取促进学习

提取练习效应是指在学习与最终测验之间,等长时间的提取练习与重复学习相比,前者更能促进长时记忆的保持,也称为测试效应。大量研究表明提取测试是一种高效的学习策略,师生却对此认识不足,认为测试只是检测学习效果的评估工具,并不能改变或促进学习。本文主要从提取练习促进学习的认知神经加工机制、提取练习在实践应用中的特点、提高提取练习效应的方法及其在教学实践中的局限四方面梳理了相关研究,为提取练习广泛应用于教学实践提供支持,同时也为师生正确高效利用这一策略提供了参考,使学生获得更高效和持久的学习。     

Free recall enhances subsequent learning

Testing, or retrieval practice, has become a central topic in memory research. One potentially important effect of retrieval practice has received little attention, however: It may enhance, or potentiate, subsequent learning. We introduce a paradigm that can measure the indirect, potentiating effect of free recall tests on subsequent learning, and then test a hypothesis for why tests may have this potentiating effect. In two experiments, the benefit of a restudy trial was enhanced when prior free recall tests had been taken. The results from a third, correlational study suggested that this effect might be mediated by the effect of testing on organization. Not only do encoding conditions affect later retrievability, but also retrieval attempts affect subsequent encoding effectiveness.     

线索强度对测试效应的调节:时间间隔上的差异

本研究采用不同线索强度(强/弱)的中文词对, 选取大学生被试126人, 考察了不同学习方式(重学/测试)在不同时间间隔(5分钟/2天)最终自由回忆测试成绩上的差异。结果发现:在强线索强度词对上, 学习方式主效应显著, 测试条件的回忆成绩在5分钟以及2天后均高于重学条件;而在弱线索强度词对上, 学习方式与间隔时间交互作用显著, 5分钟时重学条件与测试条件的记忆成绩差异不显著, 而2天后测试条件的记忆成绩却显著高于重学条件。结果表明词对的线索强度能够调节测试对不同时间间隔记忆保持的促进作用, 支持了精细提取假设。     

Filling in the gaps: using testing and restudy to promote associative learning

Although testing has been shown to potentiate subsequent learning [Izawa, C. (1966). Reinforcement-test sequences in paired-associate learning. Psychological Reports, 18, 879–919.], the mechanisms that influence this effect are not entirely understood. The present research examined the relationship between associative binding and test-potentiation effects. We hypothesised that test-potentiation effects would be most pronounced when participants could easily extract the relationship among word groupings. Towards that end, we compared three-word groupings, or triads, that were either semantically related or unrelated. Participants engaged in repeated study, repeated testing, or engaged in interpolated study and test prior to a final test. Final test performance was greatest for participants who engaged in interpolated study and test on related triads. The results support three primary conclusions: (1) testing aids in associative binding; (2) associative binding is facilitated by retrieval practice and restudy pairings; and (3) pre-existing associations facilitate test-potentiation effects.     

Comparing the testing effect under blocked and mixed practice: The mnemonic benefits of retrieval practice are not affected by practice format

The act of retrieving information modifies memory in critical ways. In particular, testing-effect studies have demonstrated that retrieval practice (compared to restudy or to no testing) benefits long-term retention and protects from retroactive interference. Although such testing effects have previously been demonstrated in both between- and within-subjects manipulations of retrieval practice, it is less clear whether one or the other testing format is most beneficial on a final test. In two paired-associate learning experiments conducted under typical testing-effect conditions, we manipulated restudy and test trials using either blocked or mixed practice conditions while equating other factors. Retrieval-practice and restudy trials were presented either separately in different blocks (blocked practice) or randomly intermixed (mixed practice). In Experiment 1, recall was assessed after short and long delay intervals; in Experiment 2, the final memory test occurred after a short delay, but with or without an interfering activity before the final test. In both experiments, typical testing effects emerged, and critically, they were found to be unaffected by practice format. These results support the conclusion that testing effects are robust and emerge to equal extents in both blocked and mixed designs. The generality of testing effects further encourages the application of retrieval practice as a memory enhancer in a variety of contexts, including education.     

Why is test-restudy practice beneficial for memory? An evaluation of the mediator shift hypothesis

Although the memorial benefits of testing are well established empirically, the mechanisms underlying this benefit are not well understood. The authors evaluated the mediator shift hypothesis, which states that test-restudy practice is beneficial for memory because retrieval failures during practice allow individuals to evaluate the effectiveness of mediators and to shift from less effective to more effective mediators. Across a series of experiments, participants used a keyword encoding strategy to learn word pairs with test-restudy practice or restudy only. Robust testing effects were obtained in all experiments, and results supported predictions of the mediator shift hypothesis. First, a greater proportion of keyword shifts occurred during test-restudy practice versus restudy practice. Second, a greater proportion of keyword shifts occurred after retrieval failure trials versus retrieval success trials during test-restudy practice. Third, a greater proportion of keywords were recalled on a final keyword recall test after test-restudy versus restudy practice.     

Retrieval-induced forgetting: Dynamic effects between retrieval and restudy trials when practice is mixed

Results from numerous previous studies suggest that when subjects study items from different categories and then repeatedly retrieve, or restudy, some of the items from some of the categories, repeated retrieval, but not repeated study, induces forgetting of related unpracticed items. We investigated in two experiments whether such effects of pure retrieval and pure study practice generalize to mixed practice—that is, when retrieval and restudy trials are randomly interleaved within a single experimental block. Experiment 1 employed cued recall; Experiment 2 employed item recognition testing. In both experiments, pure repeated retrieval, but not pure repeated study, caused forgetting of related unpracticed items, which is consistent with the prior work. In contrast, with mixed practice, both retrieval and restudy induced forgetting. Thus, whereas retrieval caused forgetting regardless of practice mode, restudy caused forgetting with mixed practice, but not with pure practice. The finding provides first evidence for dynamic effects between retrieval and restudy trials when practice is mixed. It is consistent with the view that, with mixed practice, subjects engage in more retrieval during restudy trials, so that restudy trials may trigger similar processes as retrieval trials and, thus, induce forgetting of related, not restudied, items.     

Confidence in accuracy moderates the benefits of retrieval practice

ABSTRACT

The effect of Retrieval Practice refers to the phenomenon that taking a practice test is more effective for learning than re-study, probably due to the benefit from processes underlying successful retrievals during practice. However, it is rarely studied whether other processes (e.g., metacognitive monitoring) during retrieval practice may also play an important role. In two experiments, we examined whether the effectiveness of retrieval was affected by subjects’ confidence in their retrieval success. Subjects studied word-pairs and rated their confidence after each practice test trial (cued-recall in Exp.1, multiple choice in Exp.2), or re-study trial. In both experiments, we observed the classic retrieval practice effect. Moreover, in Exp.2, the benefits differed as a function of subjects’ confidence in their retrieval performance: the effect of retrieval practice only emerged for high-confidence trials with higher than 56% confidence. In summary, the retrieval practice only facilitates the retention of correct answers with high confidence.     

Metacognitive control in self-regulated learning: Conditions affecting the choice of restudying versus retrieval practice

In two experiments, learners studied word pairs one or two times and took a final cued recall test. They studied each pair upon its initial presentation and decided whether they would restudy it later, take a practice test on it later (retrieval practice), or forego all further practice with the pair. Whether learners preferred restudying or testing depended upon conditions. Regardless of whether practice tests were followed by feedback, they chose to take practice tests relatively more often when items were easy and the lag or spacing interval between the first and second occurrence was short, whereas they chose to restudy relatively more when items were hard and the lag was long. That is, they preferred testing under conditions in which successful retrieval on the practice test was likely. In Experiment 2, we varied the number of points each item was worth if recalled on the final test. A high point value led to a marked increase in both the preference for testing when the lag was short and the preference for restudying when the lag was long. Results support the hypothesis that learners appreciate at some level that retrieval practice can be a more effective learning strategy than restudying. However, they appear to believe that successful retrieval is necessary to reap the benefits of retrieval practice. As a consequence, their tendency to choose testing is influenced by conditions (item difficulty and spacing interval) that affect the likelihood of successful practice-test retrieval.     

Do tests facilitate decision‐making performance on a transfer task?

Testing can improve later recall of information. However, much less is known about the potential use of testing in promoting the transfer of learning. In this study, we investigated whether testing improves decision‐making performance on a transfer task in a sample of 98 university students using a between‐subjects design. After studying several statements about a fictional disease under different learning conditions (restudy, free recall, and multiple‐choice), participants were asked to recall this information and subsequently make medical decisions concerning the fictional disease (i.e., the transfer task). The present study found no advantage of testing conditions over restudy condition on the 30‐min delayed memory task. However, participants in the active retrieval practice (i.e., free recall) group performed significantly better on the transfer task over those in both restudy and multiple‐choice groups. These results suggest free‐recall tests promote the transfer of learning.     

Study for now,but judge for later: Delayed judgments of learning promote long‐term retention

Larsson Sundqvist, M., Todorov, I., Kubik, V. & Jönsson, F.U. (2012) Study for now, but judge for later: Delayed judgments of learning promote long‐term retention. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 53, 450–454. Delayed judgments of learning (JOL) are assumed to be based on covert retrieval attempts. A common finding is that testing memory during learning improves later retention (i.e., the testing effect), and even more so than an equivalent amount of study, but only after a longer retention interval. To test the assertion that also delayed JOLs improve memory, the participants either studied Swahili‐Swedish word pairs four times, or they both studied (two times) and performed delayed JOLs (two times) alternately. Final cued recall test were given after either five minutes or one week. Results showed a reliable learning‐group by retention‐interval interaction, with less forgetting in the group that alternated between studying and making JOLs. The results are discussed in relation to the self‐fulfilling prophecy account of Spellman and Bjork (1992) , and in terms of study advice, the results further underscore the importance of delaying JOLs when studying and evaluating one’s ongoing learning.     

How crucial is the response format for the testing effect?

Combining study and test trials during learning is more beneficial for long-term retention than repeated study without testing (i.e., the testing effect). Less is known about the relative efficacy of different response formats during testing. We tested the hypothesis that overt testing (typing responses on a keyboard) during a practice phase benefits later memory more than covert testing (only pressing a button to indicate successful retrieval). In Experiment 1, three groups learned 40 word pairs either by repeatedly studying them, by studying and overtly testing them, or by studying and covertly testing them. In Experiment 2, only the two testing conditions were manipulated in a within-subjects design. In both experiments, participants received cued recall tests after a short (~19 min) and a long (1 week) retention interval. In Experiment 1, all groups performed equally well at the short retention interval. The overt testing group reliably outperformed the repeated study group after 1 week, whereas the covert testing group performed insignificantly different from both these groups. Hence, the testing effect was demonstrated for overt, but failed to show for covert testing. In Experiment 2, overtly tested items were better and more quickly retrieved than those covertly tested. Further, this does not seem to be due to any differences in retrieval effort during learning. To conclude, overt testing was more beneficial for later retention than covert testing, but the effect size was small. Possible explanations are discussed.     

Reversing the testing effect by feedback: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence

The testing effect refers to the finding that retrieval practice of previously studied information enhances its long-term retention more than restudy practice does. Recent work showed that the testing effect can be dramatically reversed when feedback is provided to participants during final recall testing (Storm, Friedman, Murayama, & Bjork, 2014). Following this prior work, in this study, we examined the reversal of the testing effect by investigating oscillatory brain activity during final recall testing. Twenty-six healthy participants learned cue–target word pairs and underwent a practice phase in which half of the items were retrieval practiced and half were restudy practiced. Two days later, two cued recall tests were administered, and immediate feedback was provided to participants in Test 1. Behavioral results replicated the prior work by showing a testing effect in Test 1, but a reversed testing effect in Test 2. Extending the prior work, EEG results revealed a feedback-related effect in alpha/lower-beta and retrieval-related effects in slow and fast theta power, with practice condition modulating the fast theta power effect for items that were not recalled in Test 1. The results indicate that the reversed testing effect can arise without differential strengthening of restudied and retrieval-practiced items via feedback learning. Theoretical implications of the findings, in particular with respect to the distribution-based bifurcation model of testing effects (Kornell, Bjork, & Garcia, 2011), are discussed.     

The benefit of retrieval practice over elaborative restudy in primary school vocabulary learning

The testing effect is the phenomenon that retrieval practice of learning material after studying enhances long-term retention more than restudying. We examined retrieval practice in primary school vocabulary learning in two experiments. Nine-year-old children studied word definitions and completed exercises according to three learning conditions: pure restudy, elaborative restudy or retrieval practice. Children in the pure restudy condition reread and partly copied the definitions. In the elaborative restudy condition children reread the definitions and connected semantically related words to the target words. Children in the retrieval practice condition recalled the words based on their definitions. Overall, on the fill-in-the-blank test after one week children in the retrieval practice condition outperformed children in the other conditions, but on the multiple-choice test there were no differences. Retrieval practice may be effective for primary school vocabulary learning, but there is uncertainty about the practical value and the magnitude of the retrieval practice effect.     

Retrieval practice and retention of course content in a middle school science classroom

We investigated the effect of retrieval practice (i.e., the use of testing to enhance learning) by middle school students on science learning in an authentic educational setting. For initial study, all students (n = 39) read a science text and made study notes about the text, a regular study activity in their course. For restudy (2 days later), students either copied their notes or did retrieval practice. For the final test (an additional 2 days later), all students did a recall task from memory. Students in the retrieval practice condition showed better retention of information than students in the copy condition. These results add to a growing body of research on the use of retrieval practice as an effective learning tool for retention within authentic school settings.