The discriminative-contrast hypothesis treats spacing and interleaving as distinct effects, with interleaving benefits more likely for similar than dissimilar interleaved tasks¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The discriminative-contrast hypothesis assumes spacing and interleaving are distinct effects because the interleaving effect is more likely to be obtained using more similar than less similar interleaved tasks. → Ouhao Chen 2022

Evidence¶

Ouhao Chen 2022¶

Ouhao Chen, Fred Paas, John Sweller. (2022). Reply to Sana et al.'s (2022) Commentary on Rest-from-Deliberate-Learning as a Mechanism for the Spacing Effect. Educational Psychology Review, 34, 1851–1858. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09678-1

q2 · i? · review · r2

The authors' narrative review of the spacing and interleaving literatures reports, citing Kang and Pashler (2012) and Zulkiply and Burt (2013), that "the effect is more likely to be obtained using more similar than less similar interleaved tasks". The review attributes this pattern to the cited studies.

"The discriminative-contrast hypothesis assumes they are distinct effects because the effect is more likely to be obtained using more similar than less similar interleaved tasks (Kang & Pashler, 2012; Zulkiply & Burt, 2013)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Interleaving category examples improves inductive category learning for visual and mathematical materials, but not for expository texts or word categories — related
• Verbal learning tasks with intervals filled with other to-be-learned items test the discriminative-contrast hypothesis rather than the spacing effect — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• Inserting trivia questions between interleaved exemplars impairs inductive learning when it disrupts juxtaposition of categories, with total spacing held constant — related
• When trivia questions space out exemplars, spacing and interleaving are subadditive: interleaving beats blocking only with contiguous presentation, and spacing helps blocked but not interleaved study — related
• Interleaving benefits are small for mathematical tasks and absent or reversed for expository texts and words — related
• Interleaving effects are stronger when material is more similar between categories, less similar within categories, and more complex — related
• Five null studies with spacing but no rest and dissimilar materials showed neither spacing nor interleaving effects — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Interleaved practice outperformed blocked practice across eight STEM classrooms — related
• All 67 reviewed interleaving studies demonstrated the interleaving effect using very similar interleaved concepts — related
• Interleaving is more effective for materials with a low degree of discriminability — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• All 48 reviewed spacing studies obtained the spacing effect using rest-from-deliberate-learning periods — related
• Interleaving—presenting different concepts in alternation rather than repeating the same concept—improves students' discrimination among similar concepts, terms, and principles — a narrower finding that bears on this claim