Expanding interstudy intervals led to better recall than fixed intervals, but conclusions are tentative¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2006 · checked against its sources 2026-10-19 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Overall, expanding ISIs produced better final-test performance than fixed ISIs, but large between-study variability makes this conclusion tentative. → Cepeda 2006

Evidence¶

Cepeda 2006¶

Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed Practice in Verbal Recall Tasks: A Review and Quantitative Synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 354-380. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.354

q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Meta-analytic comparison of expanding versus fixed ISI schedules, 22 accuracy comparisons and 8 effect sizes, analyzed with independent samples t tests. The article notes large standard errors indicative of large between-study variability.

"Overall, expanding ISIs led to better performance than fixed intervals (see Table 8). Fifteen out of 18 studies used a paired associate learning task, and we did not detect any systematic differences related to type of task"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Total retrieval spacing improved one-week vocabulary recall while relative schedules were not distinguished — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
• Spaced Retrieval Improves Retention — related
• The optimal interstudy interval increases as the retention interval increases — related
• Spaced presentations produce markedly better final recall than massed presentations across retention intervals — related
• ISI effects on recall are nonmonotonic and depend jointly on retention interval — related
• Students' academic outcomes tentatively benefit from teacher-focused classroom management programs — related
• The effectiveness of dropout schedules depends critically on the length of the interval between presentations of an item — related
• The authors' findings add to evidence that expanding-interval schedules are not more effective than fixed-interval schedules of practice — reports the opposite
• A 23-item-ISI dropout schedule achieved final cued-recall performance similar to conventional schedules while using significantly fewer test-restudy trials in two experiments — related
• Expanding and uniform spacing schedules of retrieval practice do not differ significantly in final retention (g = 0.034) — reports the opposite
• Structured CAI with spaced practice and spaced review produced better recall and retention than unstructured CAI — a narrower finding that bears on this claim