Multiple-choice testing improves later cued recall of prose facts, a benefit that persists though reduced after a one-week delay¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · reviewr2–r3·q2–q3
Currency · newest study 2007 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · 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? Students answered more cued recall questions correctly when the fact had been previously tested by multiple choice than when it had not, even without feedback. → Marsh 2007
q2 i? When the final test was delayed one week, the testing effect was reduced but still significant. → Marsh 2007 (2)
Evidence¶
Marsh 2007¶
Marsh, E. J., Roediger, H. L., III, Bjork, R. A., & Bjork, E. L. (2007). The memorial consequences of multiple-choice testing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(2), 194-199. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03194051
q3 · i? · review · r3
In Roediger and Marsh (2005) as described in this review, subjects read nonfiction passages; facts were tested on an initial multiple-choice test without feedback or not tested, then all subjects took a final cued recall test five minutes later, with tested facts at "M 63%" versus 40%; no standardized effect size is printed.
"Students correctly answered more questions such as “How many planets separate Jupiter from the sun?” if they had previously answered a parallel multiple-choice question (M 63%) than if they had not been tested on the fact (M 40%)."
Marsh 2007 (2)¶
Marsh, E. J., Roediger, H. L., III, Bjork, R. A., & Bjork, E. L. (2007). The memorial consequences of multiple-choice testing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(2), 194-199. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03194051
q2 · i? · review · r2
A delayed-final-test experiment by Fazio, Marsh, and Roediger (2006), cited in the review, found the testing effect on cued recall was smaller after one week yet statistically significant; no effect size is printed.
"When the final test was delayed one week, the testing effect was reduced but, importantly, still significant (Fazio, Marsh, & Roediger, 2006)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Multiple-choice testing increases the later production of multiple-choice lures as answers on cued recall tests, even under warning against guessing — related
- Taking a multiple-choice test produces a testing effect on later cued recall, but testing without study or feedback can be net harmful — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
- Providing feedback after initial multiple-choice tests cut lure intrusions on final short-answer tests roughly in half, with immediate and delayed feedback equally effective — related
- Feedback on a multiple-choice test sharply reduces lure intrusions on a later cued recall test, with immediate and delayed schedules equally effective — related
- Taking initial multiple-choice tests without feedback can lead students to later produce the incorrect lure answers they selected, even when an overall retrieval practice benefit occurs — related
- Feedback neutralizes the effect of prior study on final cued recall performance — related
- A review reports that pretesting helps paired-associate learning only when correct-answer feedback is immediate, but helps trivia-fact learning even when feedback is delayed up to 24 hours — related
- Pretesting enhances learning — related
- Pretesting before instruction enhances learning of subsequently presented material even when pretest answers are wrong, with multiple-choice pretesting more effective than cued-recall pretesting — a broader claim this one bears on
- Taking a multiple-choice test boosts performance on later tests compared with nontested control conditions, including with complex SAT II materials — related
- Retrieval before re-presentation (TTST) improves final cued recall of nonsense-syllable/number pairs relative to pure study (Experiment 1) — related
- Positive and negative testing effects occur for questions tapping higher levels of Bloom's taxonomy, and question level does not change the memorial consequences of testing — related
- Children retain self-derived knowledge over a one-week delay in classroom settings, with performance increasing from Session 1 to Session 2 — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
mc-testing-prose-cued-recall-benefit |
title |
Multiple-choice testing improves later cued recall of prose facts, a benefit that persists though reduced after a one-week delay |
description |
Multiple-choice testing improves later cued recall of prose facts, a benefit that persists though reduced after a one-week delay |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2007 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-16 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
2 — marsh-2007, marsh-2007-2 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.