Investigations of the Testing Effect

Kuo, Tzy‐Mey; Hirshman, Elliot

doi:10.2307/1423016

Cited by 79 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The efficacy of the translation of some of these components is beginning to emerge. For example, in a series of recent papers, (Chan, McDermott, & Roediger, in press;Kuo & Hirshman, 1996;McDaniel, Anderson, Derbish, & Morrisette, 2007 this issue; Roediger & Karpicke, 2006;Roediger, McDaniel, & McDermott, 2006) it has been shown that not only does testing improve memory more than does additional studying, but that this "testing effect" occurs in the classroom as well as in the lab. We used multiple tests in our programmes, and so it is reassuring to see that this was well justified: When the "testing effect" that we made use of in our composite study has been isolated in classroom situations, it does, indeed, improve learning.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A cognitive-science based programme to enhance study efficacy in a high and low risk setting

Metcalfe

Kornell

Son

2007

European Journal of Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In three experiments, learning performance in a 6-or 7-week cognitive-science based computer-study programme was compared to equal time spent self-studying on paper. The first two experiments were conducted with grade 6 and 7 children in a high risk educational setting, the third with Columbia University undergraduates. The principles the programme implemented included (1) deep, meaningful, elaborative, multimodal processing, (2) transfer-appropriate processing, (3) selfgeneration and multiple testing of responses, and (4) spaced practice. The programme was also designed to thwart metacognitive illusions that would otherwise lead to inappropriate study patterns. All three experiments showed a distinct advantage in final test performance for the cognitive-science based programme, but this advantage was particularly prominent in the children.A basic foundation for school accomplishment is the availability of higher order cognitive and metacognitive competencies to realistically assess one's knowledge, to allocate and organise study time and effort optimally, to apply cognitive principles (such as deep, elaborative rehearsal, self-generation, testing, and spacing of practice, to name just a few) that effectively enhance learning, and to resist the distractions that could undermine even the most sincerely endorsed intentions. In the population that we targeted in this research, a population of middle school children in an at-risk school setting, these competencies were strikingly limited. Their enhancement was the primary objective of this research. In addition, even among sophisticated learners, specific limitations exist in the use of certain metacognitive strategies. Children and adults often think they know things when they do not (see Metcalfe, 1998;Rawson & Dunlosky, 2007 this issue), and hence inappropriately terminate self-controlled study efforts, or otherwise study in a manner that fails to optimise learning (Bjork, 1994). We sought to devise a computerassisted study programme, based on principles of cognitive science, that would allow such metacognitive illusions to be overcome.The project reported here focused on memory enhancing principles derived from experimental studies in cognitive science. Most of these principles, because they have been studied primarily with a focus on understanding the mechanisms underlying memory and cognition, rather than on efforts to facilitate children's academic success, have been investigated in single-session experiments with scholastically irrelevant materials with college-student participants. Despite the apparent lack of connection of this cognitive science literature to real problems that children Correspondence should be addressed to Janet Metcalfe,

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A cognitive-science based programme to enhance study efficacy in a high and low risk setting

Metcalfe

Kornell

Son

2007

European Journal of Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This possibility exists because items in a test condition are not always retrieved with 100% accuracy, whereas in a restudy condition, 100% of the items are presented again. Many past studies have shown that if feedback on tests is not provided, any items that are not recalled on the test have virtually no chance of being learned (Allen et al, 1969;Bjork, 1988;Kuo & Hirshman, 1996Modigliani, 1976;Postman & Phillips, 1961); likewise, on cued recall tasks, items that elicit an error and are not followed by feedback have almost no chance of being recalled after a further delay (Pashler, Cepeda, Wixted, & Rohrer, 2005). Therefore, to avoid handicapping the learning of items in the test condition, we provided feedback after every item on the cued recall test.…”

Section: The Present Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Further afield, the effect has been obtained for face-name associations (Carpenter & DeLosh, 2005;Landauer & Bjork, 1978), general knowledge facts (McDaniel & Fisher, 1991), text passages (Chan, McDermott, & Roediger, 2006;Roediger & Marsh, 2005), and word lists (Carpenter & DeLosh, 2006;Kuo & Hirshman, 1996. One recent study even extended the testing effect to a map-learning task .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On a test several days later covering all the word pairs, memory was significantly better for words learned through the test with feedback than for words learned through additional study. The beneficial effect of testing versus restudying-that is, the testing effect-has been observed even when feedback is not provided (Allen, Mahler, & Estes, 1969;Carpenter & DeLosh, 2005Kuo & Hirshman, 1996.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The effects of tests on learning and forgetting

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The powerful effect of testing for simple verbal material has been consistently found using different types of tests (e.g., Carpenter et al 2008;Roediger 2007, 2008; Kuo and Hirshman 1996;Pyc and Rawson 2009;Toppino and Cohen 2009;Wheeler et al 2003). However, the positive effect of testing on retention appears to be less robust in studies using texts as to-be-learned materials.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Testing on the Retention of Coherent and Incoherent Text Material

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research has shown that testing during learning can enhance the long-term retention of text material. In two experiments, we investigated the testing effect with a fill-in-the-blank test on the retention of text material. In Experiment 1, using a coherent text, we found no retention benefit of testing compared to a restudy (control) condition. In Experiment 2, text coherence was disrupted by scrambling the order of the sentences from the text. The material was subsequently presented as a list of facts as opposed to connected discourse. For the incoherent version of the text, testing slowed down the rate of forgetting compared to a restudy (control) condition. The results suggest that the connectedness of materials can play an important role in determining the magnitude of testing benefits for long-term retention. Testing with a completion test seems most beneficial for unconnected materials and less so for highly structured materials.Keywords The testing effect . Retrieval practice . Text coherence . Long-term retention In recent years, there has been a resurgence of interest for the potential benefits of testing on long-term retention. Research has shown that taking tests during learning can have profound effects on later recall compared to less demanding learning strategies like repeated study Karpicke 2006a, 2006b). The general findings are especially surprising, since repeated study will most often result in superior performance on a recall test given shortly after learning. However, this short-term benefit is not long lasting. Repeated study will generally result in a relatively fast rate of forgetting, while successful retrieval of information during learning slows down the rate of forgetting (Carpenter et al. 2008;Wheeler et al. 2003). Consequently, testing generally results in superior recall performance after a relatively long retention interval. This so-called testing effect (also known as the retrieval practice effect) has been found with different types of materials and different types of tests and using a variety of retention interval conditions (Roediger and Karpicke 2006a). Claims have been made that the testing effect is of critical importance for education, and these claims have been corroborated by studies replicating Educ Psychol Rev (2015) 27:305-315

show abstract

Investigations of the Testing Effect

Cited by 79 publications

References 22 publications

A cognitive-science based programme to enhance study efficacy in a high and low risk setting

A cognitive-science based programme to enhance study efficacy in a high and low risk setting

The effects of tests on learning and forgetting

The Effect of Testing on the Retention of Coherent and Incoherent Text Material

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About