Covert retrieval is the most time-efficient practice strategy, yielding the largest gains per minute of practice for both terms and definitions¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 For participants who practiced and were tested on definitions, gains per minute were larger for covert retrieval than overt retrieval (gav = 1.30) and restudy (gav = 1.45). → Michelle L. Rivers 2025 q3 i3 The same efficiency ordering held for terms: covert > overt > restudy in gains per minute (ηp2 = 0.40). → Michelle L. Rivers 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

Michelle L. Rivers 2025¶

Michelle L. Rivers, Paige E. Northern, Sarah K. Tauber. (2025). Does Retrieval Demand Moderate the Effectiveness of Covert Retrieval Practice? Comparing Covert and Overt Retrieval Practice for Learning Key Terms and Definitions. Educational Psychology Review (2025) 37:61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10040-4

q3 · i3 · causal · r2

Gains-per-minute analysis (Fig. 4; 153 participants who practiced and were tested on definitions) showed covert retrieval (M = 0.12) beat overt retrieval (M = 0.05), "g av = 1.30", and restudy (M = 0.04), gav = 1.45; the ANOVA gave ηp2 = 0.53.

"Follow-up analyses revealed that gains per minute were larger for covert retrieval (M = 0.12, SE = 0.01) than for overt retrieval (M = 0.05, SE = 0.002), t(152) = 12.96, p < 0.001, 95% CI [0.01, 0.06], g av = 1.30;"

Michelle L. Rivers 2025 (2)¶

Michelle L. Rivers, Paige E. Northern, Sarah K. Tauber. (2025). Does Retrieval Demand Moderate the Effectiveness of Covert Retrieval Practice? Comparing Covert and Overt Retrieval Practice for Learning Key Terms and Definitions. Educational Psychology Review (2025) 37:61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10040-4

q3 · i3 · causal · r2

For the 95 participants who practiced and were tested on terms, covert retrieval (M = 0.24) beat overt retrieval (M = 0.16), "g av = 0.74", and restudy (M = 0.13), gav = 0.99; the ANOVA gave ηp2 = 0.40.

"Follow-up analyses revealed that gains per minute were larger for covert retrieval (M = 0.24, SE = 0.01) than for overt retrieval (M = 0.16, SE = 0.01), t(94) = 8.28, p < 0.001, 95% CI [0.06, 0.10], g av = 0.74;"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Both overt and covert retrieval practice outperform restudy when practice and test match (the testing effect) — related
• Overt retrieval practice produces higher delayed recall of definitions than covert retrieval practice for learners studying declarative concepts — related
• Transfer across response formats is incomplete: practicing terms benefited definition recall, but practicing definitions showed no overt-over-covert advantage on a term test — related
• Overt retrieval also outperforms covert retrieval for key terms, but with a smaller advantage than for definitions — related
• The overt-retrieval advantage does not significantly differ by definition complexity (number of idea units), contrary to a retrieval-dynamics prediction — related