Disrupting text coherence lowered both practice-test and retention-test performance¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Participants in Experiment 2 performed worse than participants in Experiment 1 on both the practice test and the retention test, consistent with coherence aiding retention. → de Jonge 2015

Evidence¶

de Jonge 2015¶

de Jonge, M., Tabbers, H. K., & Rikers, R. M. J. P. (2015). The Effect of Testing on the Retention of Coherent and Incoherent Text Material. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9300-z

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Cross-experiment descriptive comparison of averaged scores: retention test "50 vs. 59 % correct" and practice test "54 vs. 67 % correct" in favor of the coherent-text experiment. No inferential test is reported for this comparison.

"Averaged across conditions, participants in Experiment 2 performed worse compared to the participants in Experiment 1 on the retention test (50 vs. 59 % correct), and also on the practice test (54 vs. 67 % correct)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Scrambling sentence order successfully disrupted text coherence as measured by latent semantic analysis — related
• For a highly coherent text, taking a fill-in-the-blank practice test yields no retention benefit and does not slow forgetting compared to restudy — related