Five null studies with spacing but no rest and dissimilar materials showed neither spacing nor interleaving effects¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · reviewr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · 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.
q2 i? Five studies that used spacing between different concepts with no rest-from-deliberate-learning and very dissimilar materials found neither a spacing effect nor an interleaving effect. → Ouhao Chen & Fred Paas & John Sweller 2021
Evidence¶
Ouhao Chen & Fred Paas & John Sweller 2021¶
Ouhao Chen & Fred Paas & John Sweller. (2021). Spacing and Interleaving Effects Require Distinct Theoretical Bases: a Systematic Review Testing the Cognitive Load and Discriminative-Contrast Hypotheses. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09613-w
q2 · i? · review · r2
Review analysis of five null-effect studies, including Ostrow and Heffernan (2015) with knowledgeable learners and De Croock and Van Merriënboer (2007) with dissimilar troubleshooting scenarios. The review reports "There were five studies that (1)all used spacing between different concepts or skills with no rest-from-deliberate-learning, resulting in no spacing effect."
"There were five studies that (1)all used spacing between different concepts or skills with no rest-from-deliberate-learning, resulting in no spacing effect; (2) all used materials that were very dissimilar, resulting in no need to contrast and discriminate materials and so finding no interleaving effect."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- The discriminative-contrast hypothesis treats spacing and interleaving as distinct effects, with interleaving benefits more likely for similar than dissimilar interleaved tasks — a broader claim this one bears on
- Interleaving effects are stronger when material is more similar between categories, less similar within categories, and more complex — a broader claim this one bears on
- Interleaving category examples improves inductive category learning for visual and mathematical materials, but not for expository texts or word categories — related
- All 67 reviewed interleaving studies demonstrated the interleaving effect using very similar interleaved concepts — related
- All 48 reviewed spacing studies obtained the spacing effect using rest-from-deliberate-learning periods — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
five-null-studies-support-both-hypotheses |
title |
Five null studies with spacing but no rest and dissimilar materials showed neither spacing nor interleaving effects |
description |
Five null studies with spacing but no rest and dissimilar materials showed neither spacing nor interleaving effects |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2021 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-21 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — ouhao-chen-fred-paas-john-sweller-2021 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.