Final-test reading comprehension after retrieval practice does not differ significantly between an immediate test and a test delayed by three weeks¶

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? Students randomly assigned to a short-retention (immediate) or long-retention (three-week delay) final test showed no statistically significant difference in reading comprehension (F(1, 98) = 1.30, p = .257). → 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

Between-subjects factor of the classroom experiment: 100 undergraduates randomly assigned, 50 per group, to an immediate or three-week-delayed final test. The article reports "no significant difference in students’ reading comprehension observed between the different types of retention interval", F(1, 98) = 1.30, p = .257.

"There was also no significant difference in students’ reading comprehension observed between the different types of retention interval (short -retention interval vs. long-retention interval), F(1, 98) = 1.30, p = .257, suggesting that students’ perf ormances in reading comprehension between the two groups were no different from each other."

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 — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
• Retrieval Practice Enhances Long Term Retention
• Three weeks of explicit language-focused strategy instruction produced no significant word-problem gain in this study — related
• Gains from an intensive period of second-language study persist for weeks without rehearsal. — related
• 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 an immediate and a three-week-delayed final test — related
• Retrieval practice format, levels of thinking and retention interval show no significant three-way interaction on undergraduates' reading comprehension — related
• Vocabulary knowledge gained from eight encounters persisted over two weeks, with no significant immediate-to-delayed test differences — related
• All three instructional methods reduced misconceptions, and comprehension and transfer effects were stable at delayed testing one week later — related