Future research direction: verify the proposed resting effect, whereby spacing benefits may arise from working memory recovery after depletion¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · 1 claim (1 for) · 1 study (1 quant-synthesis), q4 · 1 of 1 report an effect size · 1 claim rests on one study

Description¶

The article identifies working memory depletion after cognitive effort and recovery after rest as current work that may revise the theory's assumption of relatively stable working memory capacity. It suggests that some versions of the spacing effect, in which information processed with rest periods facilitates learning compared with massed presentation, may be due to working memory recovery during rest. The author states that further work on this resting effect will need to be carried out in the future to verify the effect, establish its limits, and then inform further cognitive load theory development.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Further empirical work is needed to verify the effect and establish its limits before it can inform theory

Constraints¶

• The article presents the resting effect as a hypothesis to be verified, not an established finding

Target Learners¶

• learners studying curricular materials under spaced or massed schedules

Target Learning Goals¶

• improving retention and learning efficiency through scheduling of study and rest periods

Claims¶

• Spacing out retrieval practice produces better long-term retention than massing it [+M]

Related Strategies¶

• Additional empirical studies are needed to determine whether rest and its effect on working memory matter for the spacing effect

Examples¶

-

Key Sources¶

• John Sweller. (2023). The Development of Cognitive Load Theory: Replication Crises and Incorporation of Other Theories Can Lead to Theory Expansion. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09817-2