Expanding and uniform spacing schedules of retrieval practice do not differ significantly in final retention (g = 0.034)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesisr2·q4·i0negligible
Currency · newest study 2021 · checked against its sources 2026-10-17 (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.
q4 i0 Across 54 effect sizes, there was no significant difference between expanding and uniform spacing schedules of retrieval practice, g = 0.034, a negligible printed effect size. → Latimier 2021
Evidence¶
Latimier 2021¶
Latimier, A., Peyre, H., & Ramus, F. (2021). A Meta-Analytic Review of the Benefit of Spacing out Retrieval Practice Episodes on Retention. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09572-8
q4 · i0 · quant-synthesis · r2
Meta-analysis (subset 2) aggregating 54 effect sizes from studies comparing expanding with uniform retrieval-practice schedules via meta-regression with robust variance estimation. The review reports "no significant difference between expanding and uniform spacing schedules of retrieval practice ( g = 0.034)".
"Results from subset 2 indicated no significant difference between expanding and uniform spacing schedules of retrieval practice ( g = 0.034)."
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
- Number of retrieval exposures moderates the expanding-versus-uniform schedule benefit: more tests favour the expanding schedule — related
- Spaced Retrieval Improves Retention — related
- Expanding retrieval schedules have not shown consistent advantages over equally spaced or contracting schedules matched on total spacing — related
- Uniform two-week spacing between distillations yielded the greatest benefit among the tested schedules, ranking Standard, Mixed, Frontloaded, then Baseline — related
- Expanding interstudy intervals led to better recall than fixed intervals, but conclusions are tentative — reports the opposite
- Expanding and uniform spaced practice better for long retention intervals; contracting better for short intervals — reports the opposite
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
expanding-versus-uniform-retrieval-no-difference |
title |
Expanding and uniform spacing schedules of retrieval practice do not differ significantly in final retention (g = 0.034) |
description |
Expanding and uniform spacing schedules of retrieval practice do not differ significantly in final retention (g = 0.034) |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
strong |
newest_evidence |
2021 |
source_checked |
2026-10-17 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-13 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — latimier-2021 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.