Retrieval interval length may moderate the testing effect in mathematics: restricting to intervals over one day raises the effect to g = 0.378 (exploratory).¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesisr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2023 · 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.
q2 i? In an exploratory univariate moderator analysis, retrieval interval (less than one day versus more) neared significance (β=0.626, SE=0.162, p=.058); restricting to intervals over one day gave g = 0.378 with a CI still crossing zero. → Murray 2023
Evidence¶
Murray 2023¶
Murray, E., Horner, A. J., & Göbel, S. M. (2023). A Meta-analytic Review of the Effectiveness of Spacing and Retrieval Practice for Mathematics Learning. https://osf.io/
q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2
Exploratory moderator analysis within the retrieval subset, reported as nearing but not reaching significance. The authors report the restricted weighted mean as "g = 0.378 (se 0.108) (95% confidence interval [-0.013, 0.768])".
"one factor that neared significance despite our small sample size was retrieval interval, which was coded as a univariate variable: less than one day or more than one day ((β=0.626, SE=0.162, p=.058))."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Retention interval moderates the testing effect: effects are larger after a day or more than at shorter intervals, where individual studies vary from reliable to null or reversed — related
- Retrieval practice effects are larger at retention intervals greater than 1 day (g = 0.69) than at intervals less than 1 day (g = 0.41) in Rowland's (2014) meta-analysis — related
- The testing effect is largest at a retention interval of 1–6 days (g = 0.82) and robust across all intervals — related
- Retrieval practice produces reliable positive effects at short delays, although some forgetting must set in so that the final test is not at ceiling — related
- The testing effect for mathematics learning (testing versus restudy, g = 0.22) is not robust, as its 95% confidence interval crosses zero. — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
retrieval-interval-moderator-testing-mathematics |
title |
Retrieval interval length may moderate the testing effect in mathematics: restricting to intervals over one day raises the effect to g = 0.378 (exploratory). |
description |
Retrieval interval length may moderate the testing effect in mathematics: restricting to intervals over one day raises the effect to g = 0.378 (exploratory). |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2023 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-21 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — murray-2023 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.