Testing Effect

14,000,000 Leading Edge Experts on the ideXlab platform

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

The Experts below are selected from a list of 365709 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Liesbeth Kester - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • The Testing Effect for Learning Principles and Procedures from Texts
    Journal of Educational Research, 2014
    Co-Authors: Kim Dirkx, Liesbeth Kester, Paul A. Kirschner
    Abstract:

    The authors explored whether a Testing Effect occurs not only for retention of facts but also for application of principles and procedures. For that purpose, 38 high school students either repeatedly studied a text on probability calculations or studied the text, took a test on the content, restudied the text, and finally took the test a second time. Results show that Testing not only leads to better retention of facts than restudying, but also to better application of acquired knowledge (i.e., principles and procedures) in high school statistics. In other words, Testing seems not only to benefit fact retention, but also positively affects deeper learning.

  • The Testing-Effect for Retention Facts and Application of Knowledge
    2013
    Co-Authors: Kim Dirkx, Liesbeth Kester, Paul A. Kirschner
    Abstract:

    Dirkx, K. J. H., Kester, L., & Kirschner, P. A. (2013, 28 August). The Testing-Effect for Retention Facts and Application of Knowledge. In L. Kester (Chair), Learning from texts. Symposium conducted at the meeting of European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Munich, Germany.

  • The Testing-Effect under investigation. Experiences in Kiel
    2013
    Co-Authors: Kim Dirkx, Liesbeth Kester, Paul A. Kirschner
    Abstract:

    Dirkx, K. J. H., Kester, L., & Kirschner, P. A. (2013, 22 January). The Testing-Effect under investigation. Experiences in Kiel. Presentation held at the Learning & Cognition meeting, Heerlen, The Netherlands.

  • A Test of the Testing Effect: Acquiring Problem‐Solving Skills From Worked Examples
    Cognitive science, 2012
    Co-Authors: Tamara Van Gog, Liesbeth Kester
    Abstract:

    The "Testing Effect" refers to the finding that after an initial study opportunity, Testing is more Effective for long-term retention than restudying. The Testing Effect seems robust and is a finding from the field of cognitive science that has important implications for education. However, it is unclear whether this Effect also applies to the acquisition of problem-solving skills, which is important to establish given the key role problem solving plays in, for instance, math and science education. Worked examples are an Effective and efficient way of acquiring problem-solving skills. Forty students either only studied worked examples (SSSS) or engaged in Testing after studying an example by solving an isomorphic problem (STST). Surprisingly, results showed equal performance in both conditions on an immediate retention test after 5 min, but the SSSS condition outperformed the STST condition on a delayed retention test after 1 week. These findings suggest the Testing Effect might not apply to acquiring problem-solving skills from worked examples.

  • The influence of text length and prior knowledge on the Testing Effect in meaningful learning
    2012
    Co-Authors: Sandra Wetzels, Liesbeth Kester
    Abstract:

    Wetzels, S. A. J., & Kester, L. (2012, 14 June). The influence of text length and prior knowledge on the Testing Effect in meaningful learning. Presentation at plenary meeting Learning and Cognition, Heerlen, The Netherlands.

Peter P. J. L. Verkoeijen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Why wait if you can switch? A short term Testing Effect in cross-language recognition.
    2018
    Co-Authors: Peter P. J. L. Verkoeijen, Samantha Bouwmeester, Gino Camp
    Abstract:

    Taking a memory test after an initial study phase produces better long-term retention than restudying the items, a phenomenon known as the Testing Effect. We propose that this Effect emerges because Testing strengthens semantic features of items’ memory traces, whereas restudying strengthens surface features of items’ memory traces. This novel account predicts that a Testing Effect should be observed even after a short retention interval when a language switch occurs between the learning phase and the final test phase. We assessed this prediction with Dutch-English bilinguals who learned Dutch Deese-Roediger-McDermott word lists through restudying or through Testing (retrieval practice). Five minutes after this learning phase, they took a recognition test in Dutch (within-language condition) or in English (across-language condition). We observed a Testing Effect in the across-language condition, but not in the within-language condition. These findings corroborate our novel account of the Testing Effect.

  • Does retrieval practice depend on semantic cues? Assessing the fuzzy trace account of the Testing Effect
    Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 2017
    Co-Authors: Gerdien G. Van Eersel, Peter P. J. L. Verkoeijen, Samantha Bouwmeester, Huib K. Tabbers, Remy M. J. P. Rikers
    Abstract:

    Retrieval practice enhances long-term retention more than restudying; a phenomenon called the Testing Effect. The fuzzy trace explanation predicts that a Testing Effect will already emerge after a short interval when participants are solely provided with semantic cues in the final test. In the present study, we assessed this explanation by gradually reducing the surface features overlap between cues in the learning phase and the final recognition test. In all five experiments, participants in the control/word condition received as final test cues the same words as in the learning phase. The experimental final test cues consisted of scrambled words, words in a new context, scrambled words in a new context (Experiment 1), synonyms (Experiment 2), or images (Experiments 3, 4a, 4b). A short-term Testing Effect was only observed for the image final test cues. These results do not provide strong support for the fuzzy trace explanation of the Testing Effect.

  • The Testing Effect and Far Transfer: The Role of Exposure to Key Information
    Frontiers in psychology, 2016
    Co-Authors: Gerdien G. Van Eersel, Peter P. J. L. Verkoeijen, Migle Povilenaite, Remy M. J. P. Rikers
    Abstract:

    Butler (2010: Experiment 3) showed that retrieval practice enhanced transfer to a new knowledge domain compared to rereading. The first experiment of the present study was a direct replication of Butler’s third experiment. Participants studied text passages and then either reread them three times or went through three cycles of cued recall questions (i.e., retrieval practice) with feedback. As in Butler’s experiment (2010), an advantage of retrieval practice on the final far transfer test emerged after one week. Additionally, we observed an advantage of retrieval practice on the final test administered after five minutes. However, these advantages might have been due to participants in the retrieval practice condition receiving focused exposure to the key information (i.e., the feedback) that was needed to answer the final test questions. We therefore conducted a second experiment in which we included the retrieval practice condition and the reread condition from our first experiment, as well as a new reread-plus-statements condition. In the reread-plus-statements condition, participants received focused exposure to the key information after they had reread a text. As in Experiment 1, we found a large Effect on far transfer when retrieval practice was compared to rereading. However, this Effect was substantially reduced when retrieval practice was compared to the reread-plus-statements condition. Taken together, the results of the present experiments demonstrate that Butler’s (2010) Testing Effect in far transfer is robust. Moreover, focused exposure to key information appears to be a significant factor in this far transfer Testing Effect.

  • The Testing Effect for mediator final test cues and related final test cues in online and laboratory experiments
    BMC psychology, 2016
    Co-Authors: Leonora C. Coppens, Peter P. J. L. Verkoeijen, Samantha Bouwmeester, Remy M. J. P. Rikers
    Abstract:

    Background The Testing Effect is the finding that information that is retrieved during learning is more often correctly retrieved on a final test than information that is restudied. According to the semantic mediator hypothesis the Testing Effect arises because retrieval practice of cue-target pairs (mother-child) activates semantically related mediators (father) more than restudying. Hence, the mediator-target (father-child) association should be stronger for retrieved than restudied pairs. Indeed, Carpenter (2011) found a larger Testing Effect when participants received mediators (father) than when they received target-related words (birth) as final test cues.

  • A Short-Term Testing Effect in Cross-Language Recognition
    Psychological science, 2012
    Co-Authors: Peter P. J. L. Verkoeijen, Samantha Bouwmeester, Gino Camp
    Abstract:

    Taking a memory test after an initial study phase produces better long-term retention than restudying the items, a phenomenon known as the Testing Effect. We propose that this Effect emerges because Testing strengthens semantic features of items' memory traces, whereas restudying strengthens surface features of items' memory traces. This novel account predicts that a Testing Effect should be observed even after a short retention interval when a language switch occurs between the learning phase and the final test phase. We assessed this prediction with Dutch-English bilinguals who learned Dutch Deese-Roediger-McDermott word lists through restudying or through Testing (retrieval practice). Five minutes after this learning phase, they took a recognition test in Dutch (within-language condition) or in English (across-language condition). We observed a Testing Effect in the across-language condition, but not in the within-language condition. These findings corroborate our novel account of the Testing Effect.

Henry L. Roediger - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Reflections on the Resurgence of Interest in the Testing Effect.
    Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 2018
    Co-Authors: Henry L. Roediger, Jeffrey D. Karpicke
    Abstract:

    We discuss the findings from our 2006 article in Psychological Science on the Testing Effect and describe how the project arose. The Testing Effect (or retrieval-practice Effect) was first reported in the experimental literature about a century before our article was published, and the Effect had been replicated (and sometimes discovered anew) many times over the years. Our experiments used prose materials (unlike most prior research) and produced a more powerful Effect than prior research even though we used a conservative control condition for comparison. In our discussion, we drew out possible implications for educational practice. We also reported that students in the experiment could not predict the Effect; this lack of metacognitive awareness represented a new finding in this context. In a companion article the same year, we provided an historical review of the Testing Effect. We believe the synergistic Effect of the two articles accounts in part for the resurgence in interest in this phenomenon and its application in educational settings.

  • The Testing Effect in a social setting: Does retrieval practice benefit a listener?
    Journal of experimental psychology. Applied, 2017
    Co-Authors: Magdalena Abel, Henry L. Roediger
    Abstract:

    Retrieval practice boosts retention relative to other study strategies like restudying, a finding known as the Testing Effect. In 3 experiments, the authors investigated Testing in social contexts. Subjects participated in pairs and engaged in restudy and retrieval practice of vocabulary pairs. During retrieval practice, 1 subject acted as speaker (overt practice); the other subject listened and monitored the speaker's responses (covert practice). All experiments showed Testing Effects, with overt practice by speakers enhancing recall relative to restudy after a 2-day delay. In Experiments 1 and 2, covert practice by listeners did not benefit recall as much as overt practice. Only in Experiment 3, when listeners were asked to monitor their own covert retrieval (instead of the speaker's overt retrieval), did both types of practice convey similar benefits. The results indicate that memory retrieval is not necessarily as beneficial for listeners as for speakers. The practical implication is that the practice of teachers asking questions in class will not yield a positive Effect unless special measures are taken to insure students' effortful covert retrieval. (PsycINFO Database Record

  • comparing the Testing Effect under blocked and mixed practice the mnemonic benefits of retrieval practice are not affected by practice format
    Memory & Cognition, 2017
    Co-Authors: Magdalena Abel, Henry L. Roediger
    Abstract:

    The act of retrieving information modifies memory in critical ways. In particular, Testing-Effect studies have demonstrated that retrieval practice (compared to restudy or to no Testing) benefits long-term retention and protects from retroactive interference. Although such Testing Effects have previously been demonstrated in both between- and within-subjects manipulations of retrieval practice, it is less clear whether one or the other Testing format is most beneficial on a final test. In two paired-associate learning experiments conducted under typical Testing-Effect conditions, we manipulated restudy and test trials using either blocked or mixed practice conditions while equating other factors. Retrieval-practice and restudy trials were presented either separately in different blocks (blocked practice) or randomly intermixed (mixed practice). In Experiment 1, recall was assessed after short and long delay intervals; in Experiment 2, the final memory test occurred after a short delay, but with or without an interfering activity before the final test. In both experiments, typical Testing Effects emerged, and critically, they were found to be unaffected by practice format. These results support the conclusion that Testing Effects are robust and emerge to equal extents in both blocked and mixed designs. The generality of Testing Effects further encourages the application of retrieval practice as a memory enhancer in a variety of contexts, including education.

  • Does response mode affect amount recalled or the magnitude of the Testing Effect?
    Memory & Cognition, 2013
    Co-Authors: Adam L. Putnam, Henry L. Roediger
    Abstract:

    The Testing Effect is the finding that retrieval practice can enhance recall on future tests. One unanswered question is whether first-test response mode (writing or speaking the answer) affects final-test performance (and whether final-test response mode itself matters). An additional unsettled issue is whether written and oral recall lead to differences in the amount recalled. In three experiments, we examined these issues: whether subjects can recall more via typing or speaking; whether typing or speaking answers on a first test can lead to better final-test performance (and whether an interaction occurs with final-test response mode) and whether any form of overt response leads to better final-test performance as compared to covert retrieval (thinking of the answer but not producing it). Subjects studied paired associates; took a first test by typing, speaking, or thinking about responses; and then took a second test in which the answers were either spoken or typed. The results revealed few differences between typing and speaking during recall, and no difference in the size of the Testing Effect on the second test. Furthermore, an initial covert retrieval yielded roughly the same benefit to future test performance as did overt retrieval. Thus, the Testing Effect was quite robust across these manipulations. The practical implication for learning is that covert retrieval provides as much benefit to later retention as does overt retrieval and that both can be Effective study strategies.

  • The Testing Effect in free recall is associated with enhanced organizational processes
    Memory & Cognition, 2010
    Co-Authors: Franklin M Zaromb, Henry L. Roediger
    Abstract:

    In two experiments with categorized lists, we asked whether the Testing Effect in free recall is related to enhancements in organizational processing. During a first phase in Experiment 1, subjects studied one list over eight consecutive trials, they studied another list six times while taking two interspersed recall tests, and they learned a third list in four alternating study and test trials. On a test 2 days later, recall was directly related to the number of tests and inversely related to the number of study trials. In addition, increased Testing enhanced both the number of categories accessed and the number of items recalled from within those categories. One measure of organization also increased with the number of tests. In a second experiment, different groups of subjects studied a list either once or twice before a final criterial test, or they studied the list once and took an initial recall test before the final test. Prior Testing again enhanced recall, relative to studying on the final test a day later, and also improved category clustering. The results suggest that the benefit of Testing in free recall learning arises because Testing creates retrieval schemas that guide recall.

Paul A. Kirschner - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Kim Dirkx - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Related terms

Testing Effect - 15 days free trial to Access Experts & Abstracts