Spaced retrieval practice outperformed both massed retrieval practice and no-practice control on delayed financial knowledge, while massed and control did not differ¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3·i2medium
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.
q3 i2 Spaced practice yielded better performance than massed practice (d = .66) and control (d = .39); massed and control did not differ significantly. → Kang 2023
q3 i? Practice condition had a significant omnibus effect on final-assessment knowledge performance (partial η2 = .062). → Kang 2023
Evidence¶
Kang 2023¶
Kang, S. H. K., Eglington, L. G., Schuetze, B. A., Lu, X., Hinterstoisser, T. M., & Huaco, J. (2023). Using Cognitive Science and Technology to Enhance Financial Education: The Effect of Spaced Retrieval Practice. Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, 34(1), 20–31. https://doi.org/10.1891/JFCP-2021-0032
q3 · i2 · causal · r2
Pairwise comparisons from the same field experiment's final assessment (mean retention interval 141–142 days). Spaced beat massed with "d = .66" and control with "d = .39"; massed versus control was not significant (p = .197).
"Pairwise comparisons revealed that spaced practice yielded better performance than massed practice (t[107] = 3.453, p = .001, and d = .66) and the control group (t[121] = 2.124, p = .036, and d = .39), while the massed practice and control groups did not differ significantly from each other (t[116] = 1.299 and p = .197)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Practice condition did not significantly affect learners' subjective confidence about credit knowledge or ability to manage credit — related
- Spaced Retrieval Improves Retention — a broader claim this one bears on
- Spaced Practice Improves Retention — related
- Retrieval practice and spaced retrieval improve achievement and retention by medium amounts, while interleaving helps category learning only for some materials and blocking beats it for words — related
- Adaptive spaced retrieval practice produced higher end-of-semester posttest performance than learner-directed AI study, but fixed spaced retrieval did not significantly outperform learner-directed study — related
- Practice condition showed no significant association with self-reported financial behaviors about credit — related
- Learners Misjudge Spacing Benefits — related
- Spacing out retrieval practice produces better long-term retention than massing it — a broader claim this one bears on
- Spaced practice produces a robust small-to-medium retention advantage over massed practice for mathematics learning overall (g = 0.26). — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
spaced-beats-massed-and-control-financial-knowledge |
aliases |
spaced-retrieval-practice-improves-financial-knowledge-retention |
title |
Spaced retrieval practice outperformed both massed retrieval practice and no-practice control on delayed financial knowledge, while massed and control did not differ |
description |
Spaced retrieval practice outperformed both massed retrieval practice and no-practice control on delayed financial knowledge, while massed and control did not differ |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2023 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-02 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — kang-2023 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.