The Testing Effect as a Function of Explicit Testing Instructions and Judgments of Learning

Abstract

During study, people monitor their learning; the output of this monitoring is captured in so-called judgments of learning (JOLs). JOLs predict later recall better if they are made after a slight delay, instead of immediately after study (the delayed JOL effect). According to the self-fulfilling prophecy (SFP) hypothesis delayed JOLs are based on covert retrieval attempts from long-term memory, and successful retrieval attempts in themselves enhance learning (the testing effect). We compared memory for 40 Swahili-Swedish paired associates after a week as a function of three different learning conditions, namely study plus (i) explicitly instructed self-testing, (ii) delayed JOLs, or (iii) less self-testing. We showed that repeated delayed JOLs lead to a memory improvement that does not differ significantly from a comparable condition where the participants are explicitly testing memory, and both the latter groups performed reliably better than a group that self-tested less. The results suggest that delayed JOLs improve long-term retention as efficiently as explicit memory testing and lend support to the SFP hypothesis.

The effect of selected “desirable difficulties” on the ability to recall anatomy information

“…Perhaps the most straightforward examples of two experimental conditions that vary in terms of desirable difficulties are the much investigated and replicated "study-study" versus the "study-test" conditions (e.g., Roediger and Karpicke, 2006;Larsen et al, 2009;Karpicke and Blunt, 2011;J€ onsson et al, 2012). In the study-study condition, participants are asked to study a set of to-be-learned materials.…”

Study for now, but judge for later: Delayed judgments of learning promote long‐term retention

“…If explicit testing is replaced by delayed JOLs, as in the present study, we should see the same pattern of results. This is based on the assumption that the spontaneous and covert retrieval attempts that are associated with delayed JOLs are comparable to explicit testing (Jönsson et al ., 2012), and it is on par with the prediction of Spellman and Bjork (1992) that making delayed JOLs improves memory.…”

“…The to‐be‐remembered items consisted of 40 Swahili‐Swedish word‐pairs of varying difficulty. They were originally adapted and translated from the Swahili‐English word norms by Nelson and Dunlosky (1994; see Jönsson et al ., 2012, for the Swahili‐Swedish norms). The experiment was conducted within an E‐Prime 2.0 Professional software (Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools, Inc.) environment running on PC computers, and responses were entered on a keyboard.…”

“…As the benefit of retrieval practice is only seen after a longer retention interval, this can explain why the support is so weak for the memory prediction of the SFP theory in the literature (Rhodes & Tauber, 2011). Indeed, in a related study, Jönsson, Hedner and Olsson (2012) demonstrated that a repeated, delayed JOL condition led to superior memory after a week, compared to a study condition. However, in that study, the exposure times were not equated between the two conditions, and they did not include a short retention interval.…”

Group discussions and test-enhanced learning: individual learning outcomes and personality characteristics

“…repeated testing as a no-stakes learning activity) has consistently, and across a wide range of materials, been shown to have beneficial effects on learning, particularly with respect to long-term learning (see, e.g. Agarwal, Karpicke, Kang, Roediger, & McDermott, 2008; Finn & Roediger, 2013; Jönsson, Hedner, & Olsson, 2012; Kornell, Hays, & Bjork, 2009; Roediger & Karpicke, 2006a, 2006b; Stenlund, Sundström, & Jonsson, 2014). A general finding in this domain is that test-enhanced learning improves an individual’s learning more than just repeatedly reading certain material (Roediger & Karpicke, 2006a).…”