Testing via identical problem solving after studying identical worked examples did not significantly improve delayed test performance compared with restudying identical examples (Experiment 2)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2015 · checked against its sources 2026-10-21 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? In Experiment 2 (n=124), a 2x2x2 ANOVA on delayed final test performance showed no main effect of instruction condition (restudy vs. identical problem solving). → Tamara van Gog & Liesbeth Kester & Kim Dirkx & Vincent Hoogerheide & Joris Boerboom & Peter P. J. L. Verkoeijen 2015
Evidence¶
Tamara van Gog & Liesbeth Kester & Kim Dirkx & Vincent Hoogerheide & Joris Boerboom & Peter P. J. L. Verkoeijen 2015¶
Tamara van Gog & Liesbeth Kester & Kim Dirkx & Vincent Hoogerheide & Joris Boerboom & Peter P. J. L. Verkoeijen. (2015). Testing After Worked Example Study Does Not Enhance Delayed Problem-Solving Performance Compared to Restudy. Educ Psychol Rev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9297-3
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Experiment 2, a randomized 2x2x2 between-subjects experiment with 124 Belgian university students; the restudy condition used identical examples and the testing condition identical problems. The delayed-test ANOVA "showed no main effect of instruction, F(1,115)=1.35, p=0.247, ηp2=0.012"; final test format (identical vs. isomorphic) also showed no significant main effect. The null result shows no detected benefit of testing; equivalence was not tested.
"showed no main effect of instruction, F(1,115)=1.35, p=0.247, ηp2=0.012 and a significant main effect of final test moment, F(1,115)=14.13, p<0.001, ηp2=0.109"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Testing after studying four worked examples is not more effective for delayed test performance than restudying examples, with isomorphic or identical tasks (Experiment 3) — related
- Testing after worked example study invests more mental effort than restudying examples, so restudy is more instructionally efficient at equal delayed performance (Experiment 3) — related
- Across eight delayed-test comparisons, testing showed a small numerical advantage over restudy, but confidence intervals were wide and the combined effect imprecise — a broader claim this one bears on
- Testing after studying four worked examples does not enhance delayed test performance compared with restudy among vocational education students in probability calculation (Experiment 4) — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
exp2-no-testing-effect-identical-problems |
title |
Testing via identical problem solving after studying identical worked examples did not significantly improve delayed test performance compared with restudying identical examples (Experiment 2) |
description |
Testing via identical problem solving after studying identical worked examples did not significantly improve delayed test performance compared with restudying identical examples (Experiment 2) |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2015 |
source_checked |
2026-10-21 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-21 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — tamara-van-gog-liesbeth-kester-kim-dirkx-vincent-hoogerheide-joris-boerboom-peter-p-j-l-verkoeijen-2015 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.