Cued-recall testing can impair later memory for competitive, related but non-practiced information (retrieval-induced forgetting)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · theoreticalr3·q2
Currency · newest study 2023 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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.
q2 i? Cued-recall tests can sometimes impair later ability to answer questions about related information, and this has occasionally been shown with educational materials. → Dillon H. Murphy 2023
Evidence¶
Dillon H. Murphy 2023¶
Dillon H. Murphy, Jeri L. Little, Elizabeth L. Bjork. (2023). The Value of Using Tests in Education as Tools for Learning—Not Just for Assessment. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09808-3
q2 · i? · theoretical · r3
The commentary reports, citing Anderson et al. (1994) and educational demonstrations (Chan, 2009; Little et al., 2011, 2012), that "cued-recall tests ... can sometimes impair their ability to later answer questions involving related information." No effect size is printed.
"cued-recall tests, where students are given cues to recall information from memory, can sometimes impair their ability to later answer questions involving related information"
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Long-Term Memory — outcome: instruction changes it
Related Claims¶
- Practicing retrieval of some portions of an educational text can enhance retention of related nontested portions (retrieval-induced facilitation), but not when relational encoding is disrupted — related
- Retrieval practice effects on mediator-cued final tests have been positive, but Coppens et al. (2016) concluded the true effect may be only about 0.10 to 0.20 — related
- Taking initial multiple-choice tests without feedback can lead students to later produce the incorrect lure answers they selected, even when an overall retrieval practice benefit occurs — related
- Providing feedback after initial multiple-choice tests cut lure intrusions on final short-answer tests roughly in half, with immediate and delayed feedback equally effective — related
- Multiple-choice testing increases the later production of multiple-choice lures as answers on cued recall tests, even under warning against guessing — related
- Feedback on a multiple-choice test sharply reduces lure intrusions on a later cued recall test, with immediate and delayed schedules equally effective — related
- Incorrect information learned from a multiple-choice test is applied and reasoned with on conceptually related transfer questions — related
- Positive and negative testing effects occur for questions tapping higher levels of Bloom's taxonomy, and question level does not change the memorial consequences of testing — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
retrieval-induced-forgetting-cued-recall |
title |
Cued-recall testing can impair later memory for competitive, related but non-practiced information (retrieval-induced forgetting) |
description |
Cued-recall testing can impair later memory for competitive, related but non-practiced information (retrieval-induced forgetting) |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2023 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-19 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — dillon-h-murphy-2023 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.