The memory rating requirement moderated the restudy-versus-retrieval pattern: interference on retrieval trials and facilitation on restudy trials both contributed to the restudy superiority.¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2023 · checked against its sources 2026-10-22 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? With the memory rating required, restudy performance exceeded retrieval performance; without the rating, the pattern was descriptively reversed. → Higham 2023

Evidence¶

Higham 2023¶

Higham, P. A., Fastrich, G. M., Potts, R., Murayama, K., Pickering, J. S., & Hadwin, J. A. (2023). Spaced Retrieval Practice: Can Restudying Trump Retrieval? Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09809-2

q2 · i? · causal · r3

Experiment 2 manipulated whether the post-feedback memory rating was required, testing whether rating-induced reactivity interfered with retrieval and/or boosted restudy performance. Per the article's summary of the results, "both interference on retrieval trials and facilitation on restudy trials" contributed; the abstract adds the pattern was only descriptively reversed without ratings. No effect size was printed in the supplied text.

"The results sug- gested that both interference on retrieval trials and facilitation on restudy trials contrib- uted to the superiority of the restudy condition in Experiment 1."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• In spaced practice with post-feedback memory ratings, restudied Swahili–English pairs were recalled better than covertly or overtly retrieved pairs on a delayed final cued-recall test. — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• When the memory rating was removed entirely, retrieval practice was superior to restudying regardless of whether items were restudied or retrieved once, twice, or thrice. — related