Menu
Home Explore People Places Arts History Plants & Animals Science Life & Culture Technology
On this page
Testing effect
Memory effect in educational psychology

The testing effect (also known as retrieval practice, active recall, practice testing, or test-enhanced learning) suggests long-term memory is increased when part of the learning period is devoted to retrieving information from memory. It is different from the more general practice effect, defined in the APA Dictionary of Psychology as "any change or improvement that results from practice or repetition of task items or activities."

Cognitive psychologists are working with educators to look at how to take advantage of tests—not as an assessment tool, but as a teaching tool since testing prior knowledge is more beneficial for learning when compared to only reading or passively studying material (even more so when the test is more challenging for memory).

We don't have any images related to Testing effect yet.
We don't have any YouTube videos related to Testing effect yet.
We don't have any PDF documents related to Testing effect yet.
We don't have any Books related to Testing effect yet.
We don't have any archived web articles related to Testing effect yet.

History

Before much experimental evidence had been collected, the utility of testing was already evident to some perceptive observers including Francis Bacon who discussed it as a learning strategy as early as 1620.8

"Hence if you read a piece of text through twenty times, you will not learn it by heart so easily as if you read it ten times while attempting to recite it from time to time and consulting the text when your memory fails."

Towards the end of the 17th Century, John Locke made a similar observation regarding the importance of repeated retrieval for retention in his 1689 book "An Essay Concerning Human Understanding".

"But concerning the ideas themselves, it is easy to remark, that those that are oftenest refreshed (amongst which are those that are conveyed into the mind by more ways than one) by a frequent return of the objects or actions that produce them, fix themselves best in the memory, and remain clearest and longest there."9

Towards the end of the 19th century, Harvard psychologist William James described the testing effect in the following section of his 1890 book "The Principles of Psychology"

"A curious peculiarity of our memory is that things are impressed better by active than by passive repetition. I mean that in learning (by heart, for example), when we almost know the piece, it pays better to wait and recollect by an effort from within, than to look at the book again. If we recover the words in the former way, we shall probably know them the next time; if in the latter way, we shall very likely need the book once more." 10

The first documented empirical studies on the testing effect were published in 1909 by Edwina E. Abbott 1112 which was followed up by research into the transfer and retrieval of prior learning.1314 In his 1932 book Psychology of Study, C. A. Mace said:

"On the matter of sheer repetitive drill there is another principle of the highest importance: Active repetition is very much more effective than passive repetition. ... there are two ways of introducing further repetitions. We may re-read this list: this is passive repetition. We may recall it to mind without reference to the text before forgetting has begun: this is active repetition. It has been found that when acts of reading and acts of recall alternate, i.e., when every reading is followed by an attempt to recall the items, the efficiency of learning and retention is enormously enhanced." 15

Studies in retrieval practice started in 1987 by John. L Richards, who published his findings in a newspaper in New York. Much of the confusion around early studies could have been due to constrained approaches not accounting for context.16 In more recent research with contributions from Hal Pashler, Henry Roediger and many others, testing knowledge can produce better learning,171819 transfer,20 and retrieval 21 results when compared to other forms of study 22 that often use recognition 23 like re-reading 24 or highlighting.25

Retrieval practice

In recent research, storage strength (how well an item is learned) and retrieval strength (how well an item can be retrieved)26 have become separate measures for retrieval practice.27 Retrieval strength (also known as recall accuracy) is typically higher for restudied words when tested immediately after practice, whereas tested words were higher as time moves on.28 This suggests using tests is more beneficial for long-term memory and retrieval2930 which some authors believe is due to limited retrieval success during practice313233 supporting the idea that tests are learning opportunities.34

Functional magnetic resonance imaging suggests that retrieval practice strengthens subsequent retention of learning through a "dual action" affecting the anterior and posterior hippocampus regions of the brain.35 This could support findings that individual differences in personality traits or with working memory capacity, don't seem to have any negative impacts of the testing effect,36 with a greater impact for lower ability individuals.37

Despite some doubting knowledge transfer across a topic when testing38 with some studies showing contradictory evidence39 suggesting recognition was better than recall,40 inferential thinking has been supported41 and the transfer of learning is at its strongest with application of theory to practice, inference questions, medical education,42 and problems involving medical diagnosis.43 The transfer can occur across domains,44 paradigms,45 and help retention for material not on a final test.46 Using retrieval practices also produces less forgetting than studying and restudying47 while helping to identify misconceptions and errors484950 with effects lasting years.51

Repeated testing

Main article: Spaced repetition

Repeated testing have shown statistical significance52 and results getting better than repeated studying5354 which could be due to testing creating multiple retrieval routes for memory,55 allowing individuals to form lasting connections between items,56 or blocking information together57 which can help with memory retention58 and schema recall.59 Using spaced repetition has shown an increase on the testing effect6061 with a greater impact with a delay in testing,62 but the delay could lead to forgetting63 or retrieval-induced forgetting.

Delaying the test after a session can have a greater impact64 so studying in the day should be tested in the evening with a delay, but studying in the evening should have an immediate test due the effect sleep has on memory.65 Despite divided attention being thought to decrease the testing effect, if it is from a different medium it could enhance the effect.66

The rate of forgetting is not affected by the speed67 or degree of learning68 but by the type of practice involved.69

Test difficulty

Main article: desirable difficulty

According to the retrieval effort hypothesis, "difficult but successful retrievals are better for memory than easier successful retrievals" which supports the idea of finding a desirable difficulty within the retrieval practice considering our memory biases.70 Learning a language was better when using unfamiliar words compared to familiar words, supporting higher difficulty resulting in greater learning.71 The difficulty relates to the likelihood of forgetting72 as the harder it is to remember, the more likely you are to remember and retain the information73 supporting the notion that more effort is required for longer lasting retention74 similar to the depth of processing at encoding.75 Therefore, lack of effort from students studying could be a factor that reduces its efficiency.76

Increased difficulty shows decreased initial performance but increased performance on harder tests in the future, so retention and transfer suffer less when training is difficult.77 Even unsuccessful retrieval can enhance learning,78 as creating the thought helps with retention79 due to the generation effect.8081 Like with processing time, it is the qualitative nature of the information that determines retention.82

Getting feedback helps with learning83 but finding a desirable difficulty for the test combined with feedback84 is more beneficial than studying or testing without feedback.8586 The Read, Recite, Review method87 has been proposed as a method to combine retrieval practice with feedback.88

Test format

The test format doesn't seem to impact the results as it is the process of retrieval that aids the learning89 but transfer-appropriate processing suggests that if the encoding of information is through a format similar to the retrieval format then the test results are likely to be higher, with a mismatch causing lower results.90 However, when short-answer tests or essays are used 9192 greater gains in results are seen when compared to multiple-choice test 93

Cued recall can make retrieval easier94 as it reduces the required retrieval strength from an individual which can help short term results,95 but can hinder long term retrieval overtime due to reduced retrieval demand during practice.96 Quicker learning can reduce the rate of forgetting for a short period of time, but the effect doesn't last as long as more effortful retrieval.97 Cueing can be seen when encoding new information overlaps with prior knowledge making retrieval easier9899 or from a visual or auditory aid.

Prior knowledge seems to increase the impact of retrieval practice,100 but should not be seen as a boundary condition as individuals with higher prior knowledge and individuals with lower prior knowledge both benefit.101 Pre-testing can be used to get greater results,102103 and the post-testing can be used to facilitate learning and memory of newly studied information, known as the forward testing effect.104 Pre-test or practice test accuracy doesn't predict post test results as time affects forgetting 105

Pre-testing effect

The pre-testing effect, also known as errorful generation or pre-questioning, is a related but distinct category where testing material before the material has been learned appears to lead to better subsequent learning performance than would have been the case without the pre-test, provided that feedback is given as to the correct answers once the pre-testing phase is completed or further study is undertaken. Pre-testing has been shown to aid learning in both laboratory. and classroom settings.106 In terms of specific examples, pre-testing appears to be a beneficial strategy in language learning,107108 science classrooms generally,109 and specifically with lower ability learners in Chemistry.110 Pre-testing also seems to be a good way of introducing a lecture series and reduces mind-wandering during lectures.111 However, while some studies show that it does not seem to be as effective as post testing overall,112 others show that it is at least as effective as post-testing.113 The pre-testing effect does appear to be more target focused on the specific material to be learned and should not be seen as correlated with more generalised curiosity.114 While the strategy has been demonstrated to have learning benefits across different age groups and subject matters, it also appears to be more suited for more concrete material such as learning facts and concepts. It can be used with a variety of materials, including reading passages, videos, and live lectures.115

Practice methods

When compared to concept mapping alone, retrieval practice is more beneficial,116 despite students not seeing retrieval practice as a useful learning tool.117 When combined, learner performance was increased, suggesting concept mapping is a tool that should be combined with retrieval practice118 alongside other non-verbal responses.119 Retrieval helps with mental organization120 which can work well with concept mapping. Multimedia testing can be used121 alongside flashcards as a method of retrieval practice but removing cards too early can result in lower long term retention.122 Individuals may not correctly interpret the outcome of practice cards123 contributing to dropped cards which impact future retrieval attempts 124 therefore resulting in lower results due to increased forgetting.125

It is advised that students,126 people in care units127 and teaching professionals128129130131 use distributed132 retrieval practice133 with feedback to aid their studies.134 Interleaved practice, self-explanation,135 and elaborative interrogation136 can be useful but need more research.137 Summarization can be useful for individuals trained how to use to get the most from it.138 Keyword mnemonics and imagery for text have been somewhat helpful but the effects are often short lived.139140 However, if each of these methods are integrated with retrieval elements the testing effect is more likely to occur.

Test benefits

A list of benefits of retrieval practice.141

  • Aids later retention
  • Identifies knowledge gaps
  • Aids future related learning
  • Prevents interference from prior material in future learning
  • Aids transfer of knowledge to new contexts
  • Aids knowledge organization
  • Aids retrieval of untested information
  • Improves metacognitive monitoring
  • Provides feedback to instructors
  • Frequent testing encourages study intentions

Quizzes

A meta-analysis found the following links between frequent low-stakes quizzes in real classes and improved student academic performance:142

  • There was an association between the use of quizzes and academic performance.
  • This association was stronger in psychology classes
  • This association was stronger in all classes when quiz performance could improve class grades.
  • Students doing well on quizzes tended to lead to students doing well on final exams
  • Regular quizzing increased the chances of students passing classes

Transfer of learning

Learning using retrieval practice appears to be one of the most effective methods for promoting transfer of learning. In particular the following three techniques have been identified as particularly beneficial for transfer especially when combined with feedback: i) Implementing broad rather than narrow retrieval exercises ii) Encouraging meaningful explanations of concepts or topics iii) Using a variety of complexity and formats with questions such as retrieval questions that require inference.143

Considerations

Complex materials

Some researchers have applied aspects of cognitive load theory to suggest the testing effect may disappear with increasing task difficulty due to increased element interactivity.144 This has been addressed in the literature with studies that show complex learning is benefitted by retrieval practice.145 Further research has demonstrated that higher-order retrieval does not need to be based on a lower-level factual recall, and that from the beginning of the learning period, both should be combined for best effect.146

Future research

It has been suggested that as most studies on the impact of retrieval practice were conducted in WEIRD countries, this could cause a bias which should be explored in further studies.147

Further reading

References

  1. Roediger, H. L.; Butler, A. C. (2011). "The critical role of retrieval practice in long-term retention" (PDF). Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 15 (1): 20–27. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2010.09.003. hdl:10818/24277. PMID 20951630. S2CID 11014168. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2017-12-15. Retrieved 2015-08-19. https://web.archive.org/web/20171215055319/http://psych.wustl.edu/memory/Roddy%20article%20PDF%27s/Roediger%20%26%20Butler%20%282011%29_TCS.pdf ↩

  2. Dunlosky, J.; Rawson, K. A.; Marsh, E. J.; Nathan, M. J.; Willingham, D. T. (2013). "Improving students' learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology". Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 14 (1): 4–58. doi:10.1177/1529100612453266. PMID 26173288. S2CID 220053697. https://semanticscholar.org/paper/fafd4fb0b8d1c3a11a5a5d0ce70e7e47e7460fe8 ↩

  3. "Remember!". Retrieval Practice: A Powerful Strategy to Improve Learning. Retrieved 2016-03-12. http://www.retrievalpractice.org ↩

  4. E. Bruce Goldstein (2010-06-21). Cognitive Psychology: Connecting Mind, Research and Everyday Experience. Cengage Learning. p. 231. ISBN 978-1-133-00912-2. 978-1-133-00912-2 ↩

  5. "Practice effect". APA Dictionary of Psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. n.d. Retrieved 2021-12-04. https://dictionary.apa.org/practice-effect ↩

  6. Bae, Christine L.; Therriault, David J.; Redifer, Jenni L. (2018). "Investigating the testing effect: Retrieval as a characteristic of effective study strategies". Learning and Instruction. 60: 206–214. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.12.008. ISSN 0959-4752. S2CID 149067724. /wiki/Doi_(identifier) ↩

  7. "The Testing Effect". Revunote. 9 December 2014. Archived from the original on August 7, 2012. https://web.archive.org/web/20120807181828/http://www.revunote.com/resources/the-testing-effect/ ↩

  8. Bacon, Francis (2000). Jardine; Scott (eds.). The New Organon. [Place of publication not identified]: CAMBRIDGE TEXTS IN THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY. p. 143. ISBN 0-511-01154-7. 0-511-01154-7 ↩

  9. Locke, John (1690). An Essay Concerning Humane Understanding. Project Gutenberg. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/10615/10615-h/10615-h.htm#chap2.10 ↩

  10. James, William (1890). The Principles of Psychology Vol 1. New York: Holt. pp. Chapter 16 pg 686. ↩

  11. Abbott, Edwina (1909). "On the analysis of the factors of recall in the learning process". Psychological Monographs: General and Applied. 11 (1): 159–177. doi:10.1037/h0093018 – via Ovid. https://insights.ovid.com/psychological-monographs-general-applied/pmga/1909/11/010/analysis-factor-recall-learning-process/5/00006828 ↩

  12. Larsen, Douglas P.; Butler, Andrew C. (2013). Walsh, K. (ed.). Test-enhanced learning. pp. 443–452. ISBN 9780199652679. {{cite book}}: |journal= ignored (help) 9780199652679 ↩

  13. "Experiments as the relative efficiency of men and women in memory & reasoning". psycnet.apa.org. Retrieved 2021-12-06. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1926-03355-001 ↩

  14. Köhler, Wolfgang (1943). "Review of The Psychology of Human Learning; An Introduction". The American Journal of Psychology. 56 (3): 455–460. doi:10.2307/1417396. ISSN 0002-9556. JSTOR 1417396. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1417396 ↩

  15. Mace, C. A. (1932). The Psychology of Study. New York: R.M. McBride & Co. p. 39. ↩

  16. Barnett, Susan M.; Ceci, Stephen J. (2002). "When and where do we apply what we learn? A taxonomy for far transfer". Psychological Bulletin. 128 (4): 612–637. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.128.4.612. ISSN 0033-2909. PMID 12081085. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12081085/ ↩

  17. Brown, Alan S. (1976). "Review of Information Processing and Cognition: The Loyola Symposium". The American Journal of Psychology. 89 (2): 357–361. doi:10.2307/1421430. ISSN 0002-9556. JSTOR 1421430. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1421430 ↩

  18. Carrier, M.; Pashler, H. (1992). "The influence of retrieval on retention". Memory & Cognition. 20 (6): 632–642. doi:10.3758/bf03202713. PMID 1435266. S2CID 15893469. https://doi.org/10.3758%2Fbf03202713 ↩

  19. Izawa, Chizuko (1971-05-01). "The test trial potentiating model". Journal of Mathematical Psychology. 8 (2): 200–224. doi:10.1016/0022-2496(71)90012-5. ISSN 0022-2496. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496%2871%2990012-5 ↩

  20. McDaniel, M. A.; Roediger, H. L.; McDermott, K. B. (2007). "Generalizing test-enhanced learning from the laboratory to the classroom". Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 14 (2): 200–206. doi:10.3758/bf03194052. PMID 17694901. https://doi.org/10.3758%2Fbf03194052 ↩

  21. Roediger, Henry L.; Karpicke, Jeffrey D. (September 2006). "The Power of Testing Memory: Basic Research and Implications for Educational Practice". Perspectives on Psychological Science. 1 (3): 181–210. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00012.x. ISSN 1745-6916. PMID 26151629. S2CID 2184171. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00012.x ↩

  22. Carrier, M.; Pashler, H. (1992). "The influence of retrieval on retention". Memory & Cognition. 20 (6): 632–642. doi:10.3758/bf03202713. PMID 1435266. S2CID 15893469. https://doi.org/10.3758%2Fbf03202713 ↩

  23. Kanak, N. Jack; Neuner, Sharon D. (1970). "Associative symmetry and item availablity [sic] as a function of five methods of paired-associate acquisition". Journal of Experimental Psychology. 86 (2): 288–295. doi:10.1037/h0029975. ISSN 0022-1015. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/h0029975 ↩

  24. Karpicke, Jeffrey D.; Butler, Andrew C.; Roediger, Henry L. (2009). "Metacognitive strategies in student learning: do students practise retrieval when they study on their own?". Memory (Hove, England). 17 (4): 471–479. doi:10.1080/09658210802647009. ISSN 1464-0686. PMID 19358016. S2CID 36234279. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19358016/ ↩

  25. Peterson, Sarah E. (1991-12-01). "The cognitive functions of underlining as a study technique". Reading Research and Instruction. 31 (2): 49–56. doi:10.1080/19388079209558078. ISSN 0886-0246. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388079209558078 ↩

  26. Bjork, Robert A., and Elizabeth L. Bjork. "A new theory of disuse and an old theory of stimulus fluctuation." _From learning processes to cognitive processes: Essays in honor of William K. Estes_ 2 (1992): 35-67. //scholar.google.com/scholar?q=A_new_theory_of_disuse_and_an_old_theory_of_stimulus_fluctuation ↩

  27. Kornell, Nate; Bjork, Robert A.; Garcia, Michael A. (2011-08-01). "Why tests appear to prevent forgetting: A distribution-based bifurcation model". Journal of Memory and Language. 65 (2): 85–97. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2011.04.002. ISSN 0749-596X. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749596X11000416 ↩

  28. van den Broek, Gesa S. E.; Segers, Eliane; Takashima, Atsuko; Verhoeven, Ludo (2014-10-03). "Do testing effects change over time? Insights from immediate and delayed retrieval speed". Memory. 22 (7): 803–812. doi:10.1080/09658211.2013.831455. hdl:2066/129864. ISSN 0965-8211. PMID 23998337. S2CID 23919228. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2013.831455 ↩

  29. Roediger, H. L.; Karpicke, J. D. (2006). "Test-Enhanced Learning: Taking Memory Tests Improves Long-Term Retention" (PDF). Psychological Science. 17 (3): 249–255. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x. PMID 16507066. S2CID 16067307. Archived from the original (PDF) on 13 May 2015. Retrieved 17 August 2015. https://web.archive.org/web/20150513043900/http://psych.wustl.edu/memory/Roddy%20article%20PDF%27s/Roediger%20%26%20Karpicke%20%282006%29_PsychSci.pdf ↩

  30. Toppino, Thomas C.; Cohen, Michael S. (1 January 2009). "The Testing Effect and the Retention Interval". Experimental Psychology. 56 (4): 252–257. doi:10.1027/1618-3169.56.4.252. PMID 19439397. S2CID 2736571. /wiki/Doi_(identifier) ↩

  31. Kornell, Nate; Bjork, Robert A.; Garcia, Michael A. (2011-08-01). "Why tests appear to prevent forgetting: A distribution-based bifurcation model". Journal of Memory and Language. 65 (2): 85–97. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2011.04.002. ISSN 0749-596X. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749596X11000416 ↩

  32. van den Broek, Gesa S. E.; Segers, Eliane; Takashima, Atsuko; Verhoeven, Ludo (2014-10-03). "Do testing effects change over time? Insights from immediate and delayed retrieval speed". Memory. 22 (7): 803–812. doi:10.1080/09658211.2013.831455. hdl:2066/129864. ISSN 0965-8211. PMID 23998337. S2CID 23919228. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2013.831455 ↩

  33. Halamish, Vered; Bjork, Robert A. (2011). "When does testing enhance retention? A distribution-based interpretation of retrieval as a memory modifier". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 37 (4): 801–812. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.1033.8690. doi:10.1037/a0023219. PMID 21480751. /wiki/CiteSeerX_(identifier) ↩

  34. Foos, Paul W.; Fisher, Ronald P. (1988). "Using tests as learning opportunities". Journal of Educational Psychology. 80 (2): 179–183. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.80.2.179. ISSN 0022-0663. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/0022-0663.80.2.179 ↩

  35. Wiklund-Hörnqvist, Carola; Stillesjö, Sara; Andersson, Micael; Jonsson, Bert; Nyberg, Lars (January 2021). "Retrieval practice facilitates learning by strengthening processing in both the anterior and posterior hippocampus". Brain and Behavior. 11 (1): e01909. doi:10.1002/brb3.1909. ISSN 2162-3279. PMC 7821628. PMID 33094555. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7821628 ↩

  36. Bertilsson, Frida; Stenlund, Tova; Wiklund-Hörnqvist, Carola; Jonsson, Bert (March 2021). "Retrieval Practice: Beneficial for All Students or Moderated by Individual Differences?". Psychology Learning & Teaching. 20 (1): 21–39. doi:10.1177/1475725720973494. ISSN 1475-7257. S2CID 229459300. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1475725720973494 ↩

  37. Agarwal, Pooja K.; Finley, Jason R.; Rose, Nathan S.; Roediger, Henry L. (2017-07-03). "Benefits from retrieval practice are greater for students with lower working memory capacity". Memory. 25 (6): 764–771. doi:10.1080/09658211.2016.1220579. ISSN 0965-8211. PMID 27531308. S2CID 3649863. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09658211.2016.1220579 ↩

  38. McKenzie, Gary R. (1972-01-01). "Some Effects of Frequent Quizzes on Inferential Thinking". American Educational Research Journal. 9 (2): 231–240. doi:10.3102/00028312009002231. ISSN 0002-8312. S2CID 144657297. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312009002231 ↩

  39. Mulligan, N. W.; Picklesimer, M (2016). "Attention and the testing effect". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 42 (6): 938–950. doi:10.1037/xlm0000227. PMID 26618913. /wiki/Doi_(identifier) ↩

  40. Postman, Leo; Jenkins, William O.; Postman, Dorothy L. (1948). "An Experimental Comparison of Active Recall and Recognition". The American Journal of Psychology. 61 (4): 511–519. doi:10.2307/1418315. ISSN 0002-9556. JSTOR 1418315. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1418315 ↩

  41. Butler, A.C. (2010). "Repeated testing produces superior transfer of learning relative to repeated studying". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 36 (5): 1118–1133. doi:10.1037/a0019902. PMID 20804289. /wiki/Doi_(identifier) ↩

  42. Dobson, John L. (June 2013). "Retrieval practice is an efficient method of enhancing the retention of anatomy and physiology information". Advances in Physiology Education. 37 (2): 184–191. doi:10.1152/advan.00174.2012. ISSN 1043-4046. PMID 23728136. S2CID 16807647. https://www.physiology.org/doi/10.1152/advan.00174.2012 ↩

  43. Pan, Steven C.; Rickard, Timothy C. (July 2018). "Transfer of test-enhanced learning: Meta-analytic review and synthesis". Psychological Bulletin. 144 (7): 710–756. doi:10.1037/bul0000151. ISSN 1939-1455. PMID 29733621. S2CID 13682371. https://doi.org/10.1037%2Fbul0000151 ↩

  44. Barnett, Susan M.; Ceci, Stephen J. (2002). "When and where do we apply what we learn? A taxonomy for far transfer". Psychological Bulletin. 128 (4): 612–637. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.128.4.612. ISSN 0033-2909. PMID 12081085. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12081085/ ↩

  45. Needham, D. R.; Begg, I. M. (1991). "Problem-oriented training promotes spontaneous analogical transfer: memory-oriented training promotes memory for training". Memory & Cognition. 19 (6): 543–557. doi:10.3758/bf03197150. ISSN 0090-502X. PMID 1758301. S2CID 24200377. https://doi.org/10.3758%2Fbf03197150 ↩

  46. Chan, Jason C. K.; McDermott, Kathleen B.; Roediger, Henry L. (2006). "Retrieval-induced facilitation: initially nontested material can benefit from prior testing of related material". Journal of Experimental Psychology. General. 135 (4): 553–571. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.553. ISSN 0096-3445. PMID 17087573. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17087573/ ↩

  47. Toppino, T. C.; Cohen, M. S. (2009). "The testing effect and the retention interval: Questions and answers". Experimental Psychology. 56 (4): 252–257. doi:10.1027/1618-3169.56.4.252. PMID 19439397. S2CID 2736571. /wiki/Doi_(identifier) ↩

  48. Nelson, Adin (2021-04-02). "Additional Benefits of Incorporating Retrieval Practice Into Teaching Rounds". Journal of Graduate Medical Education. 13 (2): 293. doi:10.4300/JGME-D-20-01478.1. ISSN 1949-8357. PMC 8054592. PMID 33897968. https://meridian.allenpress.com/jgme/article/13/2/293/464050/Additional-Benefits-of-Incorporating-Retrieval ↩

  49. Butler, Andrew C.; Roediger, Henry L. (2008). "Feedback enhances the positive effects and reduces the negative effects of multiple-choice testing". Memory & Cognition. 36 (3): 604–616. doi:10.3758/mc.36.3.604. ISSN 0090-502X. PMID 18491500. S2CID 14811598. https://doi.org/10.3758%2Fmc.36.3.604 ↩

  50. Bangert-Drowns, Robert L.; Kulik, Chen-Lin C.; Kulik, James A.; Morgan, MaryTeresa (1991-06-01). "The Instructional Effect of Feedback in Test-Like Events". Review of Educational Research. 61 (2): 213–238. doi:10.3102/00346543061002213. ISSN 0034-6543. S2CID 146582125. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543061002213 ↩

  51. "Test-enhanced learning in the classroom: Long-term improvements from quizzing". psycnet.apa.org. Retrieved 2021-12-07. https://psycnet.apa.org/buy/2011-26204-001 ↩

  52. Estes, W. K. (1955). "Statistical theory of distributional phenomena in learning". Psychological Review. 62 (5): 369–377. doi:10.1037/h0046888. ISSN 0033-295X. PMID 13254976. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/13254976/ ↩

  53. Butler, Andrew C. (2010). "Repeated testing produces superior transfer of learning relative to repeated studying". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 36 (5): 1118–1133. doi:10.1037/a0019902. ISSN 1939-1285. PMID 20804289. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20804289/ ↩

  54. Roediger, H. L.; Karpicke, J. D. (2006). "Test-Enhanced Learning: Taking Memory Tests Improves Long-Term Retention" (PDF). Psychological Science. 17 (3): 249–255. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x. PMID 16507066. S2CID 16067307. Archived from the original (PDF) on 13 May 2015. Retrieved 17 August 2015. https://web.archive.org/web/20150513043900/http://psych.wustl.edu/memory/Roddy%20article%20PDF%27s/Roediger%20%26%20Karpicke%20%282006%29_PsychSci.pdf ↩

  55. Martin, E. (1968). "Stimulus meaningfulness and paired-associate transfer: an encoding variability hypothesis". Psychological Review. 75 (5): 421–441. doi:10.1037/h0026301. ISSN 0033-295X. PMID 4879426. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/4879426/ ↩

  56. McDaniel, Mark A.; Fisher, Ronald P. (1991-04-01). "Tests and test feedback as learning sources". Contemporary Educational Psychology. 16 (2): 192–201. doi:10.1016/0361-476X(91)90037-L. ISSN 0361-476X. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0361-476X%2891%2990037-L ↩

  57. Schneider, Vivian I.; Healy, Alice F.; Bourne, Lyle E. (2002-02-01). "What Is Learned under Difficult Conditions Is Hard to Forget: Contextual Interference Effects in Foreign Vocabulary Acquisition, Retention, and Transfer". Journal of Memory and Language. 46 (2): 419–440. doi:10.1006/jmla.2001.2813. ISSN 0749-596X. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749596X0192813X ↩

  58. Karpicke, J. D.; Blunt, J. R. (2011). "Retrieval practice produces more learning than elaborate studying with concept of mapping". Science. 331 (6018): 772–775. doi:10.1126/science.1199327. PMID 21252317. S2CID 206530594. https://doi.org/10.1126%2Fscience.1199327 ↩

  59. Zaromb, Franklin M.; Roediger, Henry L. (2010-12-01). "The testing effect in free recall is associated with enhanced organizational processes". Memory & Cognition. 38 (8): 995–1008. doi:10.3758/MC.38.8.995. ISSN 1532-5946. PMID 21156864. S2CID 30462402. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.38.8.995 ↩

  60. Mulligan, N. W.; Peterson, D. J. (2015). "The negative testing and negative generation effects are eliminated by delay". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 41 (4): 1014–1025. doi:10.1037/xlm0000070. PMID 25329076. /wiki/Doi_(identifier) ↩

  61. Jacoby, Larry L. (1978-12-01). "On interpreting the effects of repetition: Solving a problem versus remembering a solution". Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 17 (6): 649–667. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(78)90393-6. ISSN 0022-5371. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022537178903936 ↩

  62. Modigliani, Vito (1976). "Effects on a later recall by delaying initial recall". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory. 2 (5): 609–622. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.2.5.609. ISSN 0096-1515. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/0278-7393.2.5.609 ↩

  63. Chan, Jason C.K. (2009). "When does retrieval induce forgetting and when does it induce facilitation? Implications for retrieval inhibition, testing effect, and text processing". Journal of Memory and Language. 61 (2): 153–170. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2009.04.004. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0749596X09000461 ↩

  64. Karpicke, J. D.; Roediger, H. L. (2008). "The critical importance of retrieval for learning". Science. 319 (5865): 966–968. Bibcode:2008Sci...319..966K. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.408.8947. doi:10.1126/science.1152408. PMID 18276894. S2CID 32693. /wiki/Bibcode_(identifier) ↩

  65. Kroneisen, Meike; Kuepper-Tetzel, Carolina E. (March 2021). "Using Day and Night – Scheduling Retrieval Practice and Sleep". Psychology Learning & Teaching. 20 (1): 40–57. doi:10.1177/1475725720965363. ISSN 1475-7257. S2CID 226345154. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1475725720965363 ↩

  66. Mulligan, N. W.; Picklesimer, M (2016). "Attention and the testing effect". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 42 (6): 938–950. doi:10.1037/xlm0000227. PMID 26618913. /wiki/Doi_(identifier) ↩

  67. "Normal forgetting of verbal lists as a function of their degree of learning". content.apa.org. Retrieved 2021-12-06. https://content.apa.org/record/1984-05823-001 ↩

  68. Underwood, Benton J. (1964-04-01). "Degree of learning and the measurement of forgetting". Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 3 (2): 112–129. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(64)80028-1. ISSN 0022-5371. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022537164800281 ↩

  69. Karpicke, J. D.; Roediger, H. L. (2008). "The critical importance of retrieval for learning". Science. 319 (5865): 966–968. Bibcode:2008Sci...319..966K. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.408.8947. doi:10.1126/science.1152408. PMID 18276894. S2CID 32693. /wiki/Bibcode_(identifier) ↩

  70. Bjork, Robert A., and Elizabeth L. Bjork. "A new theory of disuse and an old theory of stimulus fluctuation." _From learning processes to cognitive processes: Essays in honor of William K. Estes_ 2 (1992): 35-67. //scholar.google.com/scholar?q=A_new_theory_of_disuse_and_an_old_theory_of_stimulus_fluctuation ↩

  71. Battig, William F. (1961). "Review of Meaningfulness and Verbal Learning". The American Journal of Psychology. 74 (4): 656–657. doi:10.2307/1419690. ISSN 0002-9556. JSTOR 1419690. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1419690 ↩

  72. Glover, John A. (1989). "The "testing" phenomenon: Not gone but nearly forgotten". Journal of Educational Psychology. 81 (3): 392–399. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.392. ISSN 0022-0663. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.392 ↩

  73. Pyc, Mary A.; Rawson, Katherine A. (May 2009). "Testing the retrieval effort hypothesis: Does greater difficulty correctly recalling information lead to higher levels of memory?" (PDF). Journal of Memory and Language. 60 (4): 437–447. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2009.01.004. S2CID 73651886. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2015-05-18. Retrieved 2015-05-15. https://web.archive.org/web/20150518093434/http://www2.kent.edu/CAS/Psychology/resources/cml/upload/Pyc-Rawson-2009-JML-pdf.pdf ↩

  74. Gardiner, F. M.; Craik, F. I.; Bleasdale, F. A. (1973). "Retrieval difficulty and subsequent recall". Memory & Cognition. 1 (3): 213–216. doi:10.3758/BF03198098. ISSN 0090-502X. PMID 24214547. S2CID 38135672. https://doi.org/10.3758%2FBF03198098 ↩

  75. Craik, Fergus I. M.; Tulving, Endel (1975). "Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory". Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 104 (3): 268–294. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.268. ISSN 1939-2222. S2CID 7896617. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.268 ↩

  76. Butler, Andrew C. (2010). "Repeated testing produces superior transfer of learning relative to repeated studying". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 36 (5): 1118–1133. doi:10.1037/a0019902. ISSN 1939-1285. PMID 20804289. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20804289/ ↩

  77. Schneider, Vivian I.; Healy, Alice F.; Bourne, Lyle E. (2002-02-01). "What Is Learned under Difficult Conditions Is Hard to Forget: Contextual Interference Effects in Foreign Vocabulary Acquisition, Retention, and Transfer". Journal of Memory and Language. 46 (2): 419–440. doi:10.1006/jmla.2001.2813. ISSN 0749-596X. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749596X0192813X ↩

  78. Kornell, Nate; Hays, Matthew Jensen; Bjork, Robert A. (2009). "Unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhance subsequent learning". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 35 (4): 989–998. doi:10.1037/a0015729. ISSN 0278-7393. PMID 19586265. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19586265/ ↩

  79. Slamucka, Norman J.; Fevreiski, Jacobo (1983-04-01). "The generation effect when generation fails". Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 22 (2): 153–163. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(83)90112-3. ISSN 0022-5371. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022537183901123 ↩

  80. Rosner, Zachary A.; Elman, Jeremy A.; Shimamura, Arthur P. (2013). "The generation effect: activating broad neural circuits during memory encoding". Cortex; A Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior. 49 (7): 1901–1909. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2012.09.009. ISSN 1973-8102. PMC 3556209. PMID 23079490. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3556209 ↩

  81. Izawa, Chizuko (1970). "Optimal potentiating effects and forgetting-prevention effects of tests in paired-associate learning". Journal of Experimental Psychology. 83 (2, Pt.1): 340–344. doi:10.1037/h0028541. ISSN 0022-1015. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/h0028541 ↩

  82. Craik, Fergus I. M.; Tulving, Endel (1975). "Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory". Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 104 (3): 268–294. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.268. ISSN 1939-2222. S2CID 7896617. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.268 ↩

  83. Rowland, Christopher A. (2014). "The effect of testing versus restudy on retention: a meta-analytic review of the testing effect". Psychological Bulletin. 140 (6): 1432–1463. doi:10.1037/a0037559. ISSN 1939-1455. PMID 25150680. S2CID 30042631. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25150680/ ↩

  84. Kubik, Veit; Gaschler, Robert; Hausman, Hannah (March 2021). "PLAT 20(1) 2021: Enhancing Student Learning in Research and Educational Practice: The Power of Retrieval Practice and Feedback". Psychology Learning & Teaching. 20 (1): 1–20. doi:10.1177/1475725720976462. ISSN 1475-7257. S2CID 232170985. /wiki/Doi_(identifier) ↩

  85. Agarwal; et al. (2007). "Examining the Testing Effect with Open- and Closed-Book Tests". Applied Cognitive Psychology. 22 (7): 861–876. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.545.4826. doi:10.1002/acp.1391. /wiki/CiteSeerX_(identifier) ↩

  86. Larsen, Douglas P.; Butler, Andrew C.; Roediger, Henry L. (2009). "Repeated testing improves long-term retention relative to repeated study: a randomised controlled trial". Medical Education. 43 (12): 1174–1181. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03518.x. ISSN 1365-2923. PMID 19930508. S2CID 2446794. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19930508/ ↩

  87. Nilson, Linda B. (2016-07-18). Teaching at Its Best: A Research-Based Resource for College Instructors. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-1-119-09632-0. 978-1-119-09632-0 ↩

  88. McDaniel, Mark A.; Howard, Daniel C.; Einstein, Gilles O. (2009). "The read-recite-review study strategy: effective and portable". Psychological Science. 20 (4): 516–522. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02325.x. ISSN 1467-9280. PMID 19320858. S2CID 8841135. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19320858/ ↩

  89. Yang, Chunliang; Potts, Rosalind; Shanks, David R. (2018-04-11). "Enhancing learning and retrieval of new information: a review of the forward testing effect". npj Science of Learning. 3 (1): 8. Bibcode:2018npjSL...3....8Y. doi:10.1038/s41539-018-0024-y. ISSN 2056-7936. PMC 6220253. PMID 30631469. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6220253 ↩

  90. Yang, Chunliang; Luo, Liang; Vadillo, Miguel A.; Yu, Rongjun; Shanks, David R. (April 2021). "Testing (quizzing) boosts classroom learning: A systematic and meta-analytic review". Psychological Bulletin. 147 (4): 399–435. doi:10.1037/bul0000309. ISSN 1939-1455. PMID 33683913. S2CID 232158956. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/bul0000309 ↩

  91. Roediger, Henry L.; Agarwal, Pooja K.; McDaniel, Mark A.; McDermott, Kathleen B. (2011). "Test-enhanced learning in the classroom: Long-term improvements from quizzing". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 17 (4): 382–395. doi:10.1037/a0026252. ISSN 1939-2192. PMID 22082095. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/a0026252 ↩

  92. McDaniel, Mark A.; Anderson, Janis L.; Derbish, Mary H.; Morrisette, Nova (2007-07-01). "Testing the testing effect in the classroom". European Journal of Cognitive Psychology. 19 (4–5): 494–513. doi:10.1080/09541440701326154. ISSN 0954-1446. S2CID 102343760. https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440701326154 ↩

  93. Agarwal, Pooja K.; Bain, Patrice M.; Chamberlain, Roger W. (2012-09-01). "The Value of Applied Research: Retrieval Practice Improves Classroom Learning and Recommendations from a Teacher, a Principal, and a Scientist". Educational Psychology Review. 24 (3): 437–448. doi:10.1007/s10648-012-9210-2. ISSN 1573-336X. S2CID 143750450. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-012-9210-2 ↩

  94. Carpenter, Shana K.; Pashler, Harold; Vul, Edward (2006). "What types of learning are enhanced by a cued recall test?". Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 13 (5): 826–830. doi:10.3758/bf03194004. ISSN 1069-9384. PMID 17328380. S2CID 14721245. https://doi.org/10.3758%2Fbf03194004 ↩

  95. Carpenter, Shana K.; DeLosh, Edward L. (2006). "Impoverished cue support enhances subsequent retention: support for the elaborative retrieval explanation of the testing effect". Memory & Cognition. 34 (2): 268–276. doi:10.3758/bf03193405. ISSN 0090-502X. PMID 16752591. S2CID 41086978. https://doi.org/10.3758%2Fbf03193405 ↩

  96. Carpenter, S.K. (2009). "Cue Strength as a Moderator of the Testing Effect: The Benefits of Elaborative Retrieval". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 35 (6): 1563–1569. doi:10.1037/a0017021. PMID 19857026. /wiki/Doi_(identifier) ↩

  97. "The psychology of human learning". psycnet.apa.org. Retrieved 2021-12-06. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1942-15076-000 ↩

  98. Morris, C. Donald; Bransford, John D.; Franks, Jeffery J. (1977-10-01). "Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing". Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 16 (5): 519–533. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(77)80016-9. ISSN 0022-5371. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022537177800169 ↩

  99. Tulving, Endel (1983). Elements of Episodic Memory. Oxford University Press. https://philpapers.org/rec/TULEOE ↩

  100. Giebl, Saskia; Mena, Stefany; Storm, Benjamin C.; Bjork, Elizabeth Ligon; Bjork, Robert A. (2021-03-01). "Answer First or Google First? Using the Internet in ways that Enhance, not Impair, One's Subsequent Retention of Needed Information". Psychology Learning & Teaching. 20 (1): 58–75. doi:10.1177/1475725720961593. ISSN 1475-7257. S2CID 226317994. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475725720961593 ↩

  101. Buchin, Zachary L.; Mulligan, Neil W. (2022-09-22). "Retrieval-based learning and prior knowledge". Journal of Educational Psychology. doi:10.1037/edu0000773. ISSN 1939-2176. S2CID 252476327. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/edu0000773 ↩

  102. Rohrer, Doug; Taylor, Kelli; Sholar, Brandon (2010). "Tests enhance the transfer of learning". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 36 (1): 233–239. doi:10.1037/a0017678. ISSN 1939-1285. PMID 20053059. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20053059/ ↩

  103. Pan, Steven C.; Sana, Faria (2021-04-01). "Pretesting versus posttesting: Comparing the pedagogical benefits of errorful generation and retrieval practice". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 27 (2): 237–257. doi:10.1037/xap0000345. ISSN 1939-2192. PMID 33793291. S2CID 232762494. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/xap0000345 ↩

  104. Kliegl, Oliver; Bäuml, Karl-Heinz T. (October 2021). "When retrieval practice promotes new learning – The critical role of study material". Journal of Memory and Language. 120: 104253. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2021.104253. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0749596X2100036X ↩

  105. Dunlosky, John; Rawson, Katherine A.; McDonald, Susan L. (2002), Schwartz, Bennett L.; Perfect, Timothy J. (eds.), "Influence of practice tests on the accuracy of predicting memory performance for paired associates, sentences, and text material", Applied Metacognition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 68–92, ISBN 978-0-521-00037-6, retrieved 2021-12-06 978-0-521-00037-6 ↩

  106. Carpenter, Shana K.; Rahman, Shuhebur; Perkins, Kyle (March 2018). "The effects of prequestions on classroom learning". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 24 (1): 34–42. doi:10.1037/xap0000145. ISSN 1939-2192. PMID 29595303. S2CID 4465862. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/xap0000145 ↩

  107. Battig, William F. (1961). "Review of Meaningfulness and Verbal Learning". The American Journal of Psychology. 74 (4): 656–657. doi:10.2307/1419690. ISSN 0002-9556. JSTOR 1419690. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1419690 ↩

  108. Schneider, Vivian I.; Healy, Alice F.; Bourne, Lyle E. (2002-02-01). "What Is Learned under Difficult Conditions Is Hard to Forget: Contextual Interference Effects in Foreign Vocabulary Acquisition, Retention, and Transfer". Journal of Memory and Language. 46 (2): 419–440. doi:10.1006/jmla.2001.2813. ISSN 0749-596X. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749596X0192813X ↩

  109. Richland, Lindsey E.; Kornell, Nate; Kao, Liche Sean (2009). "The pretesting effect: Do unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhance learning?". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 15 (3): 243–257. doi:10.1037/a0016496. ISSN 1939-2192. PMID 19751074. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/a0016496 ↩

  110. Pyburn, Daniel T.; Pazicni, Samuel; Benassi, Victor A.; Tappin, Elizabeth M. (2014-12-09). "The Testing Effect: An Intervention on Behalf of Low-Skilled Comprehenders in General Chemistry". Journal of Chemical Education. 91 (12): 2045–2057. Bibcode:2014JChEd..91.2045P. doi:10.1021/ed4009045. ISSN 0021-9584. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ed4009045 ↩

  111. Pan, Steven C.; Schmitt, Alexandra G.; Bjork, Elizabeth Ligon; Sana, Faria (December 2020). "Pretesting reduces mind wandering and enhances learning during online lectures". Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition. 9 (4): 542–554. doi:10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.07.004. ISSN 2211-369X. S2CID 221093237. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.07.004 ↩

  112. Latimier, Alice; Riegert, Arnaud; Peyre, Hugo; Ly, Son Thierry; Casati, Roberto; Ramus, Franck (2019-09-24). "Does pre-testing promote better retention than post-testing?". npj Science of Learning. 4 (1): 15. Bibcode:2019npjSL...4...15L. doi:10.1038/s41539-019-0053-1. ISSN 2056-7936. PMC 6760123. PMID 31583117. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6760123 ↩

  113. Pan, Steven C.; Sana, Faria (June 2021). "Pretesting versus posttesting: Comparing the pedagogical benefits of errorful generation and retrieval practice". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 27 (2): 237–257. doi:10.1037/xap0000345. ISSN 1939-2192. PMID 33793291. S2CID 232762494. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/xap0000345 ↩

  114. Hollins, Timothy J.; Seabrooke, Tina; Inkster, Angus; Wills, Andy; Mitchell, Chris J. (2023-02-07). "Pre-testing effects are target-specific and are not driven by a generalised state of curiosity". Memory. 31 (2): 282–296. doi:10.1080/09658211.2022.2153141. hdl:10026.1/20003. ISSN 0965-8211. PMID 36475537. S2CID 254432248. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09658211.2022.2153141 ↩

  115. Pan, Steven; Carpenter, Shana (2023). "Prequestioning and Pretesting Effects: A Review of Empirical Research, Theoretical Perspectives, and Applications". psyarxiv.com. Retrieved 2023-08-20. https://psyarxiv.com/9rqpm ↩

  116. "A powerful way to improve learning and memory". www.apa.org. Retrieved 2021-12-06. https://www.apa.org/science/about/psa/2016/06/learning-memory ↩

  117. Lechuga, M. Teresa; Ortega-Tudela, Juana M.; Gómez-Ariza, Carlos J. (December 2015). "Further evidence that concept mapping is not better than repeated retrieval as a tool for learning from texts". Learning and Instruction. 40: 61–68. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.08.002. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0959475215300232 ↩

  118. Blunt, Janell R.; Karpicke, Jeffrey D. (2014). "Learning with retrieval-based concept mapping". Journal of Educational Psychology. 106 (3): 849–858. doi:10.1037/a0035934. ISSN 1939-2176. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/a0035934 ↩

  119. Carpenter, Shana K.; Pashler, Harold (2007). "Testing beyond words: using tests to enhance visuospatial map learning". Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 14 (3): 474–478. doi:10.3758/bf03194092. ISSN 1069-9384. PMID 17874591. S2CID 11660721. https://doi.org/10.3758%2Fbf03194092 ↩

  120. "Subjective organization in free recall of "unrelated" words". psycnet.apa.org. Retrieved 2021-12-07. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1964-02036-001 ↩

  121. Johnson, Cheryl I.; Mayer, Richard E. (2009). "A testing effect with multimedia learning". Journal of Educational Psychology. 101 (3): 621–629. doi:10.1037/a0015183. ISSN 1939-2176. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/a0015183 ↩

  122. Roediger, Henry L.; Karpicke, Jeffrey D. (2006). "Repeated retrieval during learning is the key to enhancing long-term retention". PsycEXTRA Dataset. doi:10.1037/e527352012-265. Retrieved 2021-12-07. https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/e527352012-265 ↩

  123. "How do we know that we know? The accessibility model of the feeling of knowing". psycnet.apa.org. Retrieved 2021-12-06. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1994-04361-001 ↩

  124. Karpicke, Jeffrey D.; Roediger, Henry L. (2007-08-01). "Repeated retrieval during learning is the key to long-term retention". Journal of Memory and Language. 57 (2): 151–162. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2006.09.004. ISSN 0749-596X. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749596X06001367 ↩

  125. Karpicke, J. D.; Roediger, H. L. (2008). "The critical importance of retrieval for learning". Science. 319 (5865): 966–968. Bibcode:2008Sci...319..966K. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.408.8947. doi:10.1126/science.1152408. PMID 18276894. S2CID 32693. /wiki/Bibcode_(identifier) ↩

  126. Dunlosky, John (2013). "Strengthening the Student Toolbox: Study Strategies to Boost Learning". American Educator. 37 (3): 12–21. ISSN 0148-432X. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1021069 ↩

  127. Cooper, Avraham Z.; Verbeck, Nicole; McCallister, Jennifer W.; Spitzer, Carleen R. (2020-12-01). "Incorporating Retrieval Practice Into Intensive Care Unit Teaching Rounds: A Feasibility Study". Journal of Graduate Medical Education. 12 (6): 778–781. doi:10.4300/JGME-D-20-00082.1. ISSN 1949-8357. PMC 7771589. PMID 33391605. https://meridian.allenpress.com/jgme/article/12/6/778/447989/Incorporating-Retrieval-Practice-Into-Intensive ↩

  128. McDaniel, Mark A.; Agarwal, Pooja K.; Huelser, Barbie J.; McDermott, Kathleen B.; Roediger, Henry L. (2011). "Test-enhanced learning in a middle school science classroom: The effects of quiz frequency and placement". Journal of Educational Psychology. 103 (2): 399–414. doi:10.1037/a0021782. ISSN 1939-2176. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/a0021782 ↩

  129. Agarwal, Pooja K.; Bain, Patrice M. (2019-06-05). Powerful Teaching: Unleash the Science of Learning. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-1-119-52184-6. 978-1-119-52184-6 ↩

  130. Jones, Kate (2020-07-27). Retrieval Practice: Research & Resources for every classroom. John Catt Educational. ISBN 978-1-913808-06-8. 978-1-913808-06-8 ↩

  131. Agarwal, Pooja K.; Nunes, Ludmila D.; Blunt, Janell R. (2021-03-14). "Retrieval Practice Consistently Benefits Student Learning: a Systematic Review of Applied Research in Schools and Classrooms". Educational Psychology Review. 33 (4): 1409–1453. doi:10.1007/s10648-021-09595-9. ISSN 1040-726X. S2CID 235079733. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10648-021-09595-9 ↩

  132. McCabe, Jennifer (2011). "Metacognitive awareness of learning strategies in undergraduates". Memory & Cognition. 39 (3): 462–476. doi:10.3758/s13421-010-0035-2. ISSN 1532-5946. PMID 21264604. S2CID 1682524. https://doi.org/10.3758%2Fs13421-010-0035-2 ↩

  133. Gurung, R.A., 2005. How do students really study (and does it matter). Education, 39, pp.323-340. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Regan-Gurung/publication/228786091_How_Do_Students_Really_Study_and_Does_It_Matter/links/004635140972ab064d000000/How-Do-Students-Really-Study-and-Does-It-Matter.pdf ↩

  134. Augustin, Marc (2014). "How to learn effectively in medical school: test yourself, learn actively, and repeat in intervals". The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine. 87 (2): 207–212. ISSN 1551-4056. PMC 4031794. PMID 24910566. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4031794 ↩

  135. Dunlosky, J.; Rawson, K. A.; Marsh, E. J.; Nathan, M. J.; Willingham, D. T. (2013). "Improving students' learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology". Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 14 (1): 4–58. doi:10.1177/1529100612453266. PMID 26173288. S2CID 220053697. https://semanticscholar.org/paper/fafd4fb0b8d1c3a11a5a5d0ce70e7e47e7460fe8 ↩

  136. Dunlosky, John (2013). "Strengthening the Student Toolbox: Study Strategies to Boost Learning". American Educator. 37 (3): 12–21. ISSN 0148-432X. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1021069 ↩

  137. Endowment Foundation, Education. "Cognitive Science Approaches in the Classroom" (PDF). Education Endowment Foundation Website: 15–48 – via Education Endowment Foundation. https://d2tic4wvo1iusb.cloudfront.net/documents/guidance/Cognitive_science_approaches_in_the_classroom_-_A_review_of_the_evidence.pdf ↩

  138. Rinehart, Steven D.; Stahl, Steven A.; Erickson, Lawrence G. (1986). "Some Effects of Summarization Training on Reading and Studying". Reading Research Quarterly. 21 (4): 422–438. doi:10.2307/747614. ISSN 0034-0553. JSTOR 747614. https://www.jstor.org/stable/747614 ↩

  139. Wang, Alvin Y.; Thomas, Margaret H.; Ouellette, Judith A. (1992). "Keyword mnemonic and retention of second-language vocabulary words". Journal of Educational Psychology. 84 (4): 520–528. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.520. ISSN 1939-2176. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.520 ↩

  140. Dunlosky, John (2013). "Strengthening the Student Toolbox: Study Strategies to Boost Learning". American Educator. 37 (3): 12–21. ISSN 0148-432X. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1021069 ↩

  141. Roediger III, Henry L.; Putnam, Adam L.; Smith, Megan A. (2011-01-01), Mestre, Jose P.; Ross, Brian H. (eds.), "Chapter One - Ten Benefits of Testing and Their Applications to Educational Practice", Psychology of Learning and Motivation, vol. 55, Academic Press, pp. 1–36, doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-387691-1.00001-6, retrieved 2021-12-07 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780123876911000016 ↩

  142. Sotola, Lukas K.; Crede, Marcus (June 2021). "Regarding Class Quizzes: a Meta-analytic Synthesis of Studies on the Relationship Between Frequent Low-Stakes Testing and Class Performance". Educational Psychology Review. 33 (2): 407–426. doi:10.1007/s10648-020-09563-9. ISSN 1040-726X. S2CID 225447986. https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10648-020-09563-9 ↩

  143. Pan, Steven; Agarwal, Pooja. "Retrieval Practice And Transfer Of Learning Fostering Students' Application Of Knowledge" (PDF). Retrieval Practice Org: 5 – via UC San Diego. http://pdf.retrievalpractice.org/TransferGuide.pdf ↩

  144. van Gog, Tamara; Sweller, John (2015-06-01). "Not New, but Nearly Forgotten: the Testing Effect Decreases or even Disappears as the Complexity of Learning Materials Increases". Educational Psychology Review. 27 (2): 247–264. doi:10.1007/s10648-015-9310-x. hdl:1765/92178. ISSN 1573-336X. S2CID 145345472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9310-x ↩

  145. Karpicke, Jeffrey D.; Aue, William R. (June 2015). "The Testing Effect Is Alive and Well with Complex Materials". Educational Psychology Review. 27 (2): 317–326. doi:10.1007/s10648-015-9309-3. ISSN 1040-726X. S2CID 34064308. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10648-015-9309-3 ↩

  146. Agarwal, Pooja K. (February 2019). "Retrieval practice & Bloom's taxonomy: Do students need fact knowledge before higher order learning?". Journal of Educational Psychology. 111 (2): 189–209. doi:10.1037/edu0000282. ISSN 1939-2176. S2CID 91176973. https://doi.org/10.1037%2Fedu0000282 ↩

  147. Agarwal, Pooja K.; Nunes, Ludmila D.; Blunt, Janell R. (2021-03-14). "Retrieval Practice Consistently Benefits Student Learning: a Systematic Review of Applied Research in Schools and Classrooms". Educational Psychology Review. 33 (4): 1409–1453. doi:10.1007/s10648-021-09595-9. ISSN 1040-726X. S2CID 235079733. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10648-021-09595-9 ↩