Mental effort did not explain the testing effect: retrieval practice effort did not predict delayed test scores¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? In Experiment 1, higher mental effort during retrieval practice did not predict a higher test score (F(1, 58) = .10, p = .75). → Luotong Hui 2021 q3 i? In Experiment 2 there was no significant difference in invested mental effort between strategies (t(123) = .80, p = .42). → Luotong Hui 2021 (2)

Evidence¶

Luotong Hui 2021¶

Luotong Hui, Anique B. H. de Bruin, Jeroen Donkers, & Jeroen J. G. van Merriënboer. (2021). Does Individual Performance Feedback Increase the Use of Retrieval Practice? Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09604-x

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Experiment 1 simple linear regression predicting delayed test score from mental effort invested during retrieval practice: effort "did not predict a higher test score" (p = .75). Participants had rated higher effort during retrieval practice (d = .18), but this did not explain the testing effect.

"However, a regression analysis showed that higher mental effort during retrieval practice did not predict a higher test score ( F(1, 58) = .10, p = .75), which suggests that mental effort alone did not explain the testing effect."

Luotong Hui 2021 (2)¶

Luotong Hui, Anique B. H. de Bruin, Jeroen Donkers, & Jeroen J. G. van Merriënboer. (2021). Does Individual Performance Feedback Increase the Use of Retrieval Practice? Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09604-x

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Experiment 2 paired-samples comparison of Paas 9-point mental effort ratings found "no significant difference in invested mental effort" between strategies (p = .42), and effort again did not predict retrieval practice test score (F(1, 179) = 1.10, p = .30).

"There was no significant difference in invested mental effort between retrieval practice and restudy ( t(123) = .80, p = .42), which was not consistent with the results from Experiment 1."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Retrieval practice instructions improved final recall of translations in Experiment 1 — related
• The predictive value of cognitive load ratings for problem performance was mixed: mental effort predicted performance in Experiment 1, perceived difficulty in Experiment 2, but never both at once — related
• Retrieval practice instructions led students to recall items to a criterion of about three correct retrievals before dropping them — related
• Retrieval practice improves long-term retention — a broader claim this one bears on
• Students report more mental effort and subjective difficulty during oral explaining than during retrieval practice — related