Effects of retrieval practice and presentation modality on verbal learning: testing the limits of the testing effect

ABSTRACT

The testing effect refers to improved memory after retrieval practice and has been researched primarily with visual stimuli. In two experiments, we investigated whether the testing effect can be replicated when the to-be-learned information is presented auditorily, or visually?+?auditorily. Participants learned Swahili-English word pairs in one of three presentation modalities – visual, auditory, or visual?+?auditory. This was manipulated between-participants in Experiment 1 and within-participants in Experiment2. All participants studied the word pairs during three study trials. Half of participants practiced recalling the English translations in response to the Swahili cue word twice before the final test whereas the other half simply studied the word pairs twice more. Results indicated an improvement in final test performance in the repeated test condition, but only in the visual presentation modality (Experiments 1 and 2) and in the visual?+?auditory presentation modality (Experiment 2). This suggests that the benefits of practiced retrieval may be limited to information presented in a visual modality.     

Learners’ choices and beliefs about self-testing

Students have to make scores of practical decisions when they study. We investigated the effectiveness of, and beliefs underlying, one such practical decision: the decision to test oneself while studying. Using a flashcards-like procedure, participants studied lists of word pairs. On the second of two study trials, participants either saw the entire pair again (pair mode) or saw the cue and attempted to generate the target (test mode). Participants were asked either to rate the effectiveness of each study mode (Experiment 1) or to choose between the two modes (Experiment 2). The results demonstrated a mismatch between metacognitive beliefs and study choices: Participants (incorrectly) judged that the pair mode resulted in the most learning, but chose the test mode most frequently. A post-experimental questionnaire suggested that self-testing was motivated by a desire to diagnose learning rather than a desire to improve learning.     

Do students really prefer repeated rereading over testing when studying textbooks? A reexamination

ABSTRACT

Experimental studies have shown that testing promotes better long-term retention than repeated rereading. Regarding implications for educational practice, based on a survey study seemingly showing that students prefer repeated rereading over testing when studying [Karpicke, J. D., Butler, A. C., & Roediger, H. L. (2009). Metacognitive strategies in student learning: Do students practise retrieval when they study on their own? Memory, 17, 471–479. doi:10.1080/09658210802647009], it has been concluded that increasing the number of tests may boost students’ achievement. However, a closer look at the survey study reveals that “repeated rereading” has been operationalised in terms of “restudying” which represents a term that may subsume a variety of study strategies. We reexamined the study behaviour of students in a more fine-grained way by surveying both their hypothetical (Study 1) and real (Study 2) study behaviour when restudying texts. Results showed that rereading is preferred only by few students early in the learning process, with almost all shifting to testing late in the learning process, and that rereading is mainly performed in terms of “rereading not understood parts”, and rarely in terms of “repeated rereading”. These results indicate that the implications of the testing effect for educational practice may have to be reconsidered.     

Diminished testing benefits in young adults with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder

Memory retrieval has been shown to enhance the long-term retention of tested material; however, recent research suggests that limiting attention during retrieval can decrease the benefits of testing memory. The present study examined whether testing benefits are reduced in young adults with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). College students with and without ADHD read three short prose passages, each followed by a free recall test, a restudy period or a distractor task. Two days later participants recalled the passages. Although participants without ADHD did not show a significant benefit of testing over restudying, testing did produce recall benefits relative to not taking a test. These testing benefits were diminished in participants with ADHD, who did not show any advantage of testing over either restudying or no test. The absence of testing benefits in the ADHD group is likely due in part to decreased recall on the initial test. These findings have implications for improving educational practices among individuals with ADHD and also speak to the need to examine individual differences in the effectiveness of testing as a learning strategy.     

Tests improve memory – no matter if you feel good or bad while taking them

ABSTRACT

Based on studies demonstrating that testing promotes better long-term retention than restudying (i.e., the testing effect), testing has been recommended as a powerful tool to boost knowledge acquisition in educational settings. However, a factor ubiquitous in real-life learning contexts has been ignored to date: the learner's affective state. To examine whether the learner's affective state influences the testing effect, we conducted two experiments. We employed a standard testing-effect paradigm consisting of an initial study phase and a subsequent restudy/testing phase, and induced negative, neutral, or positive affective states either before participants initially studied short expository texts (Experiment 1) or before they restudied or were tested on them (Experiment 2). After one week, memory for the texts was tested. In both experiments, previously tested material was better remembered than previously restudied material. However, in none of the experiments, did the memory advantage of testing over restudying vary as a function of affect condition. Hence, the present results suggest that testing seems to benefit long-term retention independently of the learner's affective state.     

The costs and benefits of testing text materials

Tests have been shown to improve the later recall of tested information, a result known as the testing effect. Tests, however, can also impair the later recall of related information, an effect known as retrieval-induced forgetting. Although retrieval-induced forgetting has been demonstrated using a wide variety of materials, recent work suggests that learning information in the context of a coherent text passage may afford protection from retrieval-induced forgetting. In four experiments we explored the conditions under which retrieval-induced forgetting does and does not occur with such materials. We found that two factors—the coherence of the to-be-learned material and the competitiveness of retrieval practice—are important in determining whether retrieval-induced forgetting does or does not occur. Furthermore, even if retrieval-induced forgetting does occur, having the opportunity to restudy the forgotten information can prevent that forgetting from persisting. Taken together, these findings provide greater understanding of the costs and benefits of testing text materials, with possible implications for the optimisation of testing as a tool for learning in educational contexts.     

Testing improves true recall and protects against the build-up of proactive interference without increasing false recall

Retrieval practice has been shown to protect against the negative effects of previously learned information on the learning of subsequent information, while increasing retention of new information. We report three experiments investigating the impact of retrieval practice on false recall in a multiple list paradigm. In three different experimental designs participants studied blocks of interrelated words that converged on non-presented associates. Participants were tested either after every study block or only after the fifth study block, and both groups received a cumulative test on all five study blocks. Overall the results from all three different experimental designs point to a benefit of testing in increasing long-term veridical recall on the cumulative test. More importantly, this improvement in veridical recall did not come at a cost: False recall on the cumulative test did not increase from retrieval practice.     

Movement variability near goal equivalent manifolds: Fluctuations,control, and model-based analysis

Fluctuations in the repeated performance of human movements have been the subject of intense scrutiny because they are generally believed to contain important information about the function and health of the neuromotor system. A variety of approaches has been brought to bear to study these fluctuations. However it is frequently difficult to understand how to synthesize different perspectives to give a coherent picture. Here, we describe a conceptual framework for the experimental study of motor variability that helps to unify geometrical methods, which focus on the role of motor redundancy, with dynamical methods that characterize the error-correcting processes regulating the performance of skilled tasks. We describe how goal functions, which mathematically specify the task strategy being employed, together with ideas from the control of redundant systems, allow one to formulate simple, experimentally testable dynamical models of inter-trial fluctuations. After reviewing the basic theory, we present a list of five general hypotheses on the structure of fluctuations that can be expected in repeated trials of goal-directed tasks. We review recent experimental applications of this general approach, and show how it can be used to precisely characterize the error-correcting control used by human subjects.     

Priming semantic concepts affects the dynamics of aesthetic appreciation

Aesthetic appreciation (AA) plays an important role for purchase decisions, for the appreciation of art and even for the selection of potential mates. It is known that AA is highly reliable in single assessments, but over longer periods of time dynamic changes of AA may occur. We measured AA as a construct derived from the literature through attractiveness, arousal, interestingness, valence, boredom and innovativeness. By means of the semantic network theory we investigated how the priming of AA-relevant semantic concepts impacts the dynamics of AA of unfamiliar product designs (car interiors) that are known to be susceptible to triggering such effects. When participants were primed for innovativeness, strong dynamics were observed, especially when the priming involved additional AA-relevant dimensions. This underlines the relevance of priming of specific semantic networks not only for the cognitive processing of visual material in terms of selective perception or specific representation, but also for the affective-cognitive processing in terms of the dynamics of aesthetic processing.     

How do students implement collaborative testing in real-world contexts?

Recent research has explored the effects of collaborative testing, showing costs and benefits during learning and for subsequent memory. However, no prior research is informative about whether and how students use collaborative testing in real-world contexts. Accordingly, the primary purpose of the current research was to explore the extent to which students use collaborative testing during self-regulated learning. We conducted three surveys (n = 692 across three samples) asking students about their use of collaborative testing, with a particular interest in conditions under which students report implementing collaborative testing. Among the key outcomes, a majority of students reported using collaborative testing when studying in a group. Additionally, students reported that key term definitions are the material most often used during collaborative testing. Students are also more motivated to use testing and believe testing is more effective and more fun when implemented in a group versus alone. Outcomes also shed light on metacognitive components of collaborative testing, with the student asking (versus answering) the question making the monitoring judgement whereas both students make the control decision about when to terminate practice. We discuss ways in which the collaborative memory literature can be extended to support more successful student learning.