The effect of retention interval on reading comprehension after retrieval practice does not differ significantly between lower-order and higher-order thinking questions¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3
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.
q3 i? No statistically significant interaction was observed between retention interval and levels of thinking (F(1, 98) = 0.90, p = .345). → Nero 2021
Evidence¶
Nero 2021¶
Nero, C. A., & Zulkiply, N. (2021). The Effects of Retrieval Practice Across Levels of Thinking and Retention Interval on Reading Comprehension. Asian Journal of University Education (AJUE), 17(4). https://doi.org/10.24191/ajue.v17i4.16222
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Classroom experiment with 100 first-year Cognitive Psychology undergraduates in a 2 x 2 x 2 mixed-subjects design, analysed with a three-way mixed ANOVA on final multiple-choice test scores. The article reports "no interaction effect observed between retention interval and levels of thinking", F(1, 98) = 0.90, p = .345.
"there was also no interaction effect observed between retention interval and levels of thinking, F(1, 98) = 0.90, p = .345, suggesting that the effect of different retention intervals on reading comprehension was equivalent for both lower - and higher -order thinking."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Short-answer (production) and multiple-choice (recognition) retrieval practice produce no statistically significant difference in undergraduates' reading comprehension on a final MCQ test — related
- Final-test reading comprehension after retrieval practice does not differ significantly between an immediate test and a test delayed by three weeks — related
- After retrieval practice, undergraduates score significantly higher on lower-order thinking questions than on higher-order thinking questions about a studied passage — related
- Retrieval practice format, levels of thinking and retention interval show no significant three-way interaction on undergraduates' reading comprehension — related
- The effect of retrieval practice format on reading comprehension does not differ significantly between lower-order and higher-order thinking questions — related
- The effect of retrieval practice format on reading comprehension does not differ significantly between an immediate and a three-week-delayed final test — related
- Implicit feedback via higher- and lower-order questions showed no significant effect on first-graders' reading comprehension — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
retention-interval-by-levels-of-thinking-interaction-not-significant |
title |
The effect of retention interval on reading comprehension after retrieval practice does not differ significantly between lower-order and higher-order thinking questions |
description |
The effect of retention interval on reading comprehension after retrieval practice does not differ significantly between lower-order and higher-order thinking questions |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2021 |
generated |
by claude/unspecified on 2026-09-24 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — nero-2021 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.