The aim of this study was to examine whether repeated testing with feedback benefits learning compared to rereading of introductory psychology key-concepts in an educational context. The testing effect was examined immediately after practice, after 18 days, and at a five-week delay in a sample of undergraduate students (n = 83). The results revealed that repeated testing with feedback significantly enhanced learning compared to rereading at all delays, demonstrating that repeated retrieval enhances retention compared to repeated encoding in the short- and the long-term. In addition, the effect of repeated testing was beneficial for students irrespectively of working memory capacity. It is argued that teaching methods involving repeated retrieval are important to consider by the educational system.
a b s t r a c tMemory retrieval is an active process that can alter the content and accessibility of stored memories. Of potential relevance for educational practice are findings that memory retrieval fosters better retention than mere studying. This so-called testing effect has been demonstrated for different materials and populations, but there is limited consensus on the neurocognitive mechanisms involved. In this review, we relate cognitive accounts of the testing effect to findings from recent brain-imaging studies to identify neurocognitive factors that could explain the testing effect. Results indicate that testing facilitates later performance through several processes, including effects on semantic memory representations, the selective strengthening of relevant associations and inhibition of irrelevant associations, as well as potentiation of subsequent learning.
Retrieval practice is known to lead to better retention of a to-be-learned material than restudy (i.e., the testing effect). However, few studies have investigated retrieval practice in relation to working memory capacity (WMC) and personality characteristics such as grittiness (Grit) and need for cognition (NFC). In two experiments, we examined retrieval practice and restudy of Swahili–Swedish word pairs in relation to individual differences in Grit and NFC. In Experiment 1, using a between-subjects design, a significant main effect of retention interval was qualified by a Group × Retention Interval interaction. However, there were no effects of Grit or NFC. In Experiment 2, a within-subjects design was used, and a measure of WMC was included. The analyses revealed a testing effect; but again, WMC, Grit, and NFC were not significantly associated with performance. These results indicate that retrieval practice levels out the playing field regarding WMC, NFC, and Grit.
Encoding and retrieval processes enhance long-term memory performance. The efficiency of encoding processes has recently been linked to representational consistency: the reactivation of a representation that gets more specific each time an item is further studied. Here we examined the complementary hypothesis of whether the efficiency of retrieval processes also is linked to representational consistency. Alternatively, recurrent retrieval might foster representational variability-the altering or adding of underlying memory representations. Human participants studied 60 Swahili-Swedish word pairs before being scanned with fMRI the same day and 1 week later. On Day 1, participants were tested three times on each word pair, and on Day 7 each pair was tested once. A BOLD signal change in right superior parietal cortex was associated with subsequent memory on Day 1 and with successful long-term retention on Day 7. A representational similarity analysis in this parietal region revealed that beneficial recurrent retrieval was associated with representational variability, such that the pattern similarity on Day 1 was lower for retrieved words subsequently remembered compared with those subsequently forgotten. This was mirrored by a monotonically decreased BOLD signal change in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex on Day 1 as a function of repeated successful retrieval for words subsequently remembered, but not for words subsequently forgotten. This reduction in prefrontal response could reflect reduced demands on cognitive control. Collectively, the results offer novel insights into why memory retention benefits from repeated retrieval, and they suggest fundamental differences between repeated study and repeated testing.
The testing effect, defined as the positive effect of retrieval practice (i.e., self-testing) on long-term memory retention relative to other ways to support learning, is a robust empirical phenomenon. Despite substantial scientific evidence for the testing effect, less is known about its effectiveness in relation to individual differences in cognitive ability. In the present study, we examine whether the effect of retrieval practice is beneficial independent of cognitive ability using behavioral and brain imaging data. In a within-subject design, upper-secondary students learned Swahili–Swedish word pairs through retrieval practice and study. The testing effects were assessed at a direct test and for a subsample after 1- and 4-weeks retention intervals, respectively. Another subsample performed the 1-week retention test during functional MRI (fMRI). Memory retention was analyzed in relation to an educationally relevant composite score dividing participants into low, intermediate, and high cognitive-ability groups. We provide behavioral evidence that the testing effect is independent of cognitive ability. The fMRI findings confirmed a general effectiveness of retrieval practice by showing that brain regions associated with successful retrieval of conceptual representations and semantic processing were more strongly engaged after retrieval practice in all cognitive-ability groups. It is argued that the advantages of retrieval practice should be conveyed to all teachers and students.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.