scholarly journals A Systematic Review of the Testing Effect in Learning

2013 ◽  
Vol 23 (56) ◽  
pp. 397-406 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raquel Eloisa Eisenkraemer ◽  
Antonio Jaeger ◽  
Lilian Milnitsky Stein
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Testing Effect ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Theoretical Explanation ◽  
Test Format ◽  
Term Retention ◽  
Acute Increase ◽  
Long Term Retention

The retrieval of a given piece of information from memory increases the long-term retention of that information, a phenomenon often called “testing effect”. The current study aimed to select and review articles on the testing effect to verify the extent and importance of this phenomenon, bringing the main results of recent research. To accomplish this, a systematic review of articles on this subject published between 2006 and 2012 was conducted, a period in which there was an acute increase in the amount of publications on this subject. The articles were searched in the databases Web of Science, PubMed and PsycINFO. The results, which were organized according to test format (recall and recognition tests), demonstrated that tests can be remarkably beneficial to the retention of long-term memories. A theoretical explanation regarding the cognitive processes involved in this phenomenon still needs to be developed and tested. Such explanation would have important implications for the development of efficient educational practices.

scholarly journals Testing Effect

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-36
Author(s):  
Olesya Senkova ◽  
Hajime Otani ◽  
Reid L. Skeel ◽  
Renée L. Babcock
Keyword(s):  
Testing Effect ◽  
Cued Recall ◽  
Online Classes ◽  
Open Book ◽  
Test Format ◽  
Term Retention ◽  
Book Versus ◽  
Long Term Retention ◽  
Book Format

Abstract. If assessment is the purpose of testing, open-book tests may defeat the purpose. However, a goal of education is to build knowledge, and based on the literature, open-book tests may not be inferior to closed-book tests in promoting long-term retention of information. Participants studied Swahili-English pairs and either re-studied or took an initial quiz, which was cued recall or recognition in an open-book or closed-book format. One week later, the final closed-book recognition test showed higher performance in the quizzed conditions than in the study-twice condition, replicating the testing effect. However, performance was similar across the quizzed conditions, indicating that testing promoted long-term retention regardless of test format (open-book versus closed-book) and test type (cued recall versus recognition). Open-book tests are not inferior to closed-book tests in building knowledge and can be particularly useful in online classes because preventing cheating is difficult when closed-book tests are administered online.

scholarly journals Does pre-testing promote better retention than post-testing?

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice Latimier ◽  
Arnaud Riegert ◽  
Hugo Peyre ◽  
Son Thierry Ly ◽  
Roberto Casati ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Learning Strategies ◽  
Testing Effect ◽  
Retrieval Practice ◽  
Initial Exposure ◽  
Testing Effects ◽  
Learning Content ◽  
Term Retention ◽  
Reading Condition ◽  
Long Term Retention

Abstract Compared with other learning strategies, retrieval practice seems to promote superior long-term retention. This has been found mostly in conditions where learners take tests after being exposed to learning content. However, a pre-testing effect has also been demonstrated, with promising results. This raises the question, for a given amount of time dedicated to retrieval practice, whether learners should be tested before or after an initial exposure to learning content. Our experiment directly compares the benefits of post-testing and pre-testing relative to an extended reading condition, on a retention test 7 days later. We replicated both post-testing (d = 0.74) and pre-testing effects (d = 0.35), with significantly better retention in the former condition. Post-testing also promoted knowledge transfer to previously untested questions, whereas pre-testing did not. Our results thus suggest that it may be more fruitful to test students after than before exposure to learning content.

Test format and corrective feedback modify the effect of testing on long-term retention

2007 ◽  
Vol 19 (4-5) ◽  
pp. 528-558 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean H. K. Kang ◽  
Kathleen B. McDermott ◽  
Henry L. Roediger
Keyword(s):  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Test Format ◽  
Term Retention ◽  
Long Term Retention

Individual and Combined Effects of Enactment and Testing on Memory for Action Phrases

2014 ◽  
Vol 61 (5) ◽  
pp. 347-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veit Kubik ◽  
Hedvig Söderlund ◽  
Lars-Göran Nilsson ◽  
Fredrik U. Jönsson
Keyword(s):  
Testing Effect ◽  
Cued Recall ◽  
Combined Effects ◽  
Additive Effects ◽  
Term Retention ◽  
Long Term Retention ◽  
Retention Intervals ◽  
Study Techniques ◽  
The Individual

We investigated the individual and combined effects of enactment and testing on memory for action phrases to address whether both study techniques commonly promote item-specific processing. Participants (N = 112) were divided into four groups (n = 28). They either exclusively studied 36 action phrases (e.g., “lift the glass”) or both studied and cued-recalled them in four trials. During study trials participants encoded the action phrases either by motorically performing them, or by reading them aloud, and they took final verb-cued recall tests over 18-min and 1-week retention intervals. A testing effect was demonstrated for action phrases, however, only when they were verbally encoded, and not when they were enacted. Similarly, enactive (relative to verbal) encoding reduced the rate of forgetting, but only when the action phrases were exclusively studied, and not when they were also tested. These less-than-additive effects of enactment and testing on the rate of forgetting, as well as on long-term retention, support the notion that both study techniques effectively promote item-specific processing that can only be marginally increased further by combining them.

Putting action into testing: Enacted retrieval benefits long-term retention more than covert retrieval

2020 ◽  
Vol 73 (12) ◽  
pp. 2093-2105
Author(s):  
Veit Kubik ◽  
Fredrik U Jönsson ◽  
Mario de Jonge ◽  
Artin Arshamian
Keyword(s):  
Memory Retrieval ◽  
Testing Effect ◽  
Recall Test ◽  
Retrieval Practice ◽  
Memory Performance ◽  
Cued Recall ◽  
Term Retention ◽  
Long Term Retention ◽  
Motor Actions

Retrieval practice improves long-term retention. However, it is currently debated if this testing effect can be further enhanced by overtly producing recalled responses. We addressed this issue using a standard cued-recall testing-effect paradigm with verb–noun action phrases (e.g., water the plant) to prompt motor actions as a specifically powerful response format of recall. We then tested whether motorically performing the recalled verb targets (e.g., ?–the plant) during an initial recall test ( enacted retrieval) led to better long-term retention than silently retrieving them ( covert retrieval) or restudying the complete verb–noun phrases ( restudy). The results demonstrated a direct testing effect, in that long-term retention was enhanced for covert retrieval practice compared to restudy practice. Critically, enactment during retrieval further improved long-term retention beyond the effect of covert memory retrieval, both in a congruent noun-cued recall test after 1 week (Experiment 1) and in an incongruent verb-cued recall test of nouns after 2 weeks (Experiment 2). This finding suggests that successful memory retrieval and ensuing enactment contribute to future memory performance in parts via different mechanisms.

scholarly journals Οι μακροχρόνιες επιδράσεις της επαναλαμβανόμενης ανάσυρσης στη μάθηση απαιτητικού εκπαιδευτικού υλικού

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 32
Author(s):  
Μαρία Αμερικάνου ◽  
Ελβίρα Μασούρα ◽  
Βάια Παπαγεωργίου ◽  
Δέσποινα Μωραΐτου
Keyword(s):  
University Students ◽  
Testing Effect ◽  
Retrieval Practice ◽  
The Other ◽  
Practice Group ◽  
Term Retention ◽  
On Line ◽  
Long Term Retention ◽  
First Session

The present study investigated the applications of “testing effect” in education, observing how University Students learn a demanding scientific passage under the condition of retrieval practice. Sixty University Students presented with a long text of 350 words to-be-learned. They all evaluated in two sessions: during the first session all participant read the passage for three times over 7 minutes per time. During the second session half of the student read the passage once more for 7 minutes while the other half asked to recall as many information from the passage as possible. In a final evaluation 5 minutes after the second session all participants asked to recall information from the passage. The same evaluation took place 2 days later and one week later, to estimate the long-term retention of the information. Results revealed that the two groups did not differ on the evaluation 5 minutes or 2 days after the reading/testing of the passage, but they differ significantly on the evaluation that took place a weekafter the first session, with the retrieval practice group to recall more information. Results are on line with the notion that repetition retrieval leads not to better learning but to a durable long-term retention.

Long-term retention is greater following closed-book tests than open-book tests

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pooja K. Agarwal ◽  
Jeffrey D. Karpicke ◽  
Sean H. Kang ◽  
Henry L. Roediger ◽  
Kathleen B. McDermott
Keyword(s):  
Open Book ◽  
Term Retention ◽  
Long Term Retention
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document