Retrieval practice format, levels of thinking and retention interval show no significant three-way interaction on undergraduates' reading comprehension¶

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

Subclaims¶

q3 i? The three-way interaction of retrieval practice type, levels of thinking and retention interval was not statistically significant (F(1, 98) = 0.003, p = .959). → 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 significant interaction between these three variables", F(1, 98) = 0.003, p = .959; Table 1 gives cell means and SDs.

"the results showed that there was no significant interaction between these three variables, F(1, 98) = 0.003, p = .959, signifying that the effects of the types of retrie val practice and levels of thinking on student’s reading comprehension was similar in both short - and long-retention intervals."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Evidence on whether initial short-answer questions produce more learning than initial multiple-choice questions is mixed, with recent studies finding little or no difference — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
• Short-answer (production) and multiple-choice (recognition) retrieval practice produce no statistically significant difference in undergraduates' reading comprehension on a final MCQ test — related
• The effect of retention interval on reading comprehension after retrieval practice 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 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
• 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
• Information retrieval questions were consistently easier than comprehension questions across both visualisation formats — related
• The training-by-content interaction did not vary with retention interval duration in the human experiment — related
• Co-occurring motivational and comprehension-related problems did not produce the hypothesized highest combined strategy frequencies — related
• Implicit feedback via higher- and lower-order questions showed no significant effect on first-graders' reading comprehension — related