Mechanisms behind the testing effect: an empirical investigation of retrieval practice in meaningful learning

Abstract

The testing effect—more learning by testing as compared to restudying—is a well-established finding. A typical testing procedure in the context of meaningful learning comprises a recall task after an initial study phase. Different theories refer to different mechanisms when explaining the positive effects of such recall tasks. In the context of learning from expository texts, we tested three mechanisms as suggested by a variety of prominent approaches: the elaborative-retrieval theory, the theory of transfer-appropriate processing, and the unspecific-goal perspective. We experimentally varied the type of testing task (short-answer task vs. free-recall task, both compared to a restudy task) in a within-subject design (N = 47 university students). We replicated the testing effect. We found no evidence for a transfer-appropriate processing effect or an unspecific-goal effect. The testing effect disappeared when statistically controlling for mental effort. Initially non-tested material was also fostered by testing (spreading activation effect). These findings indicate that testing helps learning when learners must invest substantial mental effort, as suggested by the elaborative retrieval theory. For educational purposes, testing tasks should be assigned that require the learners to invest substantial mental effort.

Student‐Generated Pre‐Exam Questions is an Effective Tool for Participatory Learning: A Case Study from Ecology of Waterborne Pathogens Course

“…According to it, similarities between intervention (for example, pre‐exam questions) and the tests drive the testing effect. Although this was not specifically tested in this study, others found no experimental support for the transfer‐appropriate processing (Carpenter and DeLosh ; Endres and Renkl ).…”

“…Thus, the elaborative retrieval hypothesis postulates that the intensity of mental effort invested during the intervention phase accounts for the gains of testing (Carpenter and DeLosh ; Carpenter ). Furthermore, follow‐up studies showed that it was the mental effort per se involved in the retrieval of the information during the intervention (intermediate test) that accounted for much of the gains (Endres and Renkl ). Bjork and others () agree and highlight the need for a certain level of “desirable difficulty” for the intermediate testing to result in increased recall (Bjork and others ).…”

Active Learning Through Discussion: ICAP Framework for Education in Health Professions

“…2) support the previous study. 20 Overall, only the difference in mental effort patterns between two studying conditions and the simple mediation analysis combined suggest how students' study affects the degree of mental effort during studying and testing, eventually influencing their learning performance. 21 Thus, the negative correlation can be interpreted as students spending unproductive efforts during testing compared with when they study or discuss the materials.…”

Short‐ and long‐term effects of retrieval practice on learning concepts in evidence‐based medicine: Experimental study

“…where one has to elaborate information to solve the task. 7 As the influence of retrieval-based learning on knowledge retention has not, to the best of our knowledge, been explored in the context of EBM, we compared the effectiveness of retrieval-based learning and standard learning by rereading on knowledge retention in medical students exposed to EBM concepts for the first time (first-year students) and those already familiar with these concepts (second-year students).…”

“…9 The trial in our study was anonymous and voluntary, so there is a possibility that participants did not invest substantial effort in the tasks, which is important for a testing effect. 7 Future research should be performed in a context that will induce student motivation, such as embedding the testing into a course exam. Also, our study was performed in a single institution, which limits the generalizability of the results.…”