Claims

End-of-semester recall of course material was better for relearning than for restudying

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2020 · 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? Recall of course material at the end of the semester was better for relearning compared to restudying. → Philip A. Higham 2020

Evidence

Philip A. Higham 2020

Philip A. Higham, Bettina Zengel, Laura Bartlett, and Julie A. Hadwin (2020). The Benefits of Successive Relearning on Multiple Learning Outcomes. https://osf.io/nx4va/?view_only=049ee04aab4f420e9fa0091b3b69b9d0

q2 · i? · causal · r2

The article's abstract reports the outcome of the semester-long within-participants experiment in which students alternated weekly between relearning and restudying with exposure time controlled: "Recall of course material at the end of the semester was better for relearning compared to restudying."

"Recall of course material at the end of the semester was better for relearning compared to restudying."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id successive-relearning-better-semester-end-recall
title End-of-semester recall of course material was better for relearning than for restudying
description End-of-semester recall of course material was better for relearning than for restudying
status review
evidence_strength moderate
newest_evidence 2020
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-23
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — philip-a-higham-2020

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.