Repeatedly recalling a text without feedback or rereading produces the best one-week retention, while repeated studying leads on a final test at the end of the session¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (3 entries) · review r2–r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The chapter reports, citing Roediger and Karpicke (2006b), that students who recalled a text three times (STTT) remembered the most on a final test 1 week later. → Karpicke 2017 q2 i? In the same experiment, on a test at the end of the session, repeated studying produced an advantage. → Karpicke 2017 (2) q2 i? The chapter reports, citing Hanawalt (1937), that subjects who repeatedly recalled line drawings at each retention interval showed little or no forgetting. → Karpicke 2017 (3)

Evidence¶

Karpicke 2017¶

Karpicke, J. D. (2017). Retrieval-Based Learning: A Decade of Progress. Learning and Memory: A Comprehensive Reference, 2nd edition, Volume 2. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809324-5.21055-9

q2 · i? · review · r3

The chapter reports a time-matched experiment by Roediger and Karpicke (2006b) with no feedback: at 1 week, "students who had repeatedly recalled the text three times remembered the most", more than repeated-study conditions.

"On this assessment of long-term retention, students who had repeatedly recalled the text three times remembered the most, more than students who had spent more time studying the materials in the other conditions."

Karpicke 2017 (2)¶

Karpicke, J. D. (2017). Retrieval-Based Learning: A Decade of Progress. Learning and Memory: A Comprehensive Reference, 2nd edition, Volume 2. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809324-5.21055-9

q2 · i? · review · r2

In the same experiment as reported by the chapter, "there was an advantage of having spent more time repeatedly studying the text" on the test at the end of the session, which the chapter attributes to reexposure.

"When the final test occurred at the end of the experimental session, there was an advantage of having spent more time repeatedly studying the text."

Karpicke 2017 (3)¶

Karpicke, J. D. (2017). Retrieval-Based Learning: A Decade of Progress. Learning and Memory: A Comprehensive Reference, 2nd edition, Volume 2. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809324-5.21055-9

q2 · i? · review · r3

The chapter describes Hanawalt's (1937) experiment with geometric line drawings recalled at intervals up to 2 months: in the repeated retrieval condition "there was little or no forgetting over time", unlike single recall groups.

"A second group of subjects repeatedly recalled the drawings at each retention interval. Fig. 2 shows that in this repeated retrieval condition, there was little or no forgetting over time."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Long-Term Memory — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Feedback Enhances Retrieval Practice — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
• Retrieval Practice Enhances Long Term Retention
• Rereading Less Effective Than Retrieval Practice
• Spaced retrieval practice produces better final retention than massed retrieval even though spacing lowers initial retrieval success, and more absolute spacing enhances long-term retention — related
• A math teacher whose students had typically prepared for tests by rereading notes implemented three retrieval-practice strategies after learning that rereading is not effective for long-term retention — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Spaced and interleaved homework practice improves learning and retention — related
• The pretesting effect on text memory grows with retention interval, being largest at one week — related