A short-ISI dropout schedule (5-drop) used significantly fewer trials but yielded lower final test performance than conventional schedules in Experiment 1¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2007 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? The 5-drop schedule was significantly less effective at final test than the 5-5-5 and 1-5-9 conventional schedules despite fewer trials. → Pyc 2007

Evidence¶

Pyc 2007¶

Pyc, M. A., & Rawson, K. A. (2007). Examining the efficiency of schedules of distributed retrieval practice. Memory & Cognition, 35(8), 1917-1927. https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/BF03193420

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Experiment 1, 161 undergraduates, five schedule groups. The omnibus schedule main effect was not significant, F(4,156) = 1.76, p = .14; the interaction approached significance, F(4,156) = 2.33, p = .058, and follow-up t tests showed the 5-drop group lower (t(62) = 2.19 and t(61) = 2.10).

"Follow-up tests showed that performance in the 5-drop group was lower than that in the 5-5-5 and 1-5-9 groups"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The effectiveness of dropout schedules depends critically on the length of the interval between presentations of an item — a broader claim this one bears on
• A 23-item-ISI dropout schedule achieved final cued-recall performance similar to conventional schedules while using significantly fewer test-restudy trials in two experiments — related
• Dropping initially correct items incurred a cost relative to a long-ISI conventional schedule in Experiment 2, but this was offset by gains on initially incorrect items — related
• The dropout schedule was particularly effective for initially incorrect items, an advantage not attributable to initial ISI length and, the authors judge, unlikely to be due to item difficulty in Experiment 2 — related