Far transfer of retrieval-practice benefits: rule-based learning as the underlying mechanism.

Benefits of self-testing for learning have been consistently shown for simple materials such as word lists learned by rote memorization. Considerably less evidence for such benefits exists for complex, more educationally relevant materials and its application to new situations. The present study explores the mechanisms underlying this transfer. To this end, a typical retrieval-practice-effect paradigm was applied to foster the learning of an artificial language. Participants either repeatedly studied grammatically correct exemplar sentences of the artificial language or engaged in a cloze test as the interim test after learning. To assess far transfer, participants in both groups of restudy and retrieval practice engaged in a grammaticality judgment test after a delay of 5 min and 1 week. In addition, participants in both groups completed a final memory test (i.e., a cloze test identical to the initial test) 1 week after learning. In addition to a long-term memory benefit of retrieval practice, results revealed also a retrieval-practice benefit in the far-transfer test after the 1-week delay. The findings further support the view that far transfer is supported by learning the underlying grammatical rules as opposed to memorizing the material. Thus, retrieval practice is also effective for fostering learning of complex materials and, even more importantly, for promoting transfer of learning-a crucial goal in modern educational practices.

Testing the dual-memory framework: individual differences in the magnitude of the retrieval practice effect and fluid intelligence.

Retrieving information from memory enhances long-term retention. In this manuscript, we describe the dual-memory framework, which makes interval-scale predictions of the magnitude of this retrieval practice effect. After outlining the framework, we use data from our laboratory-both at the group level and at the distribution level-to fit the equations from the dual-memory framework. Overall, we successfully fitted the model predictions to the observed average data. In addition, we compared the predicted and the observed distributions of performance in the retrieval practice condition. More importantly, we introduce a useful approach to simulate empirical scenarios and test the relationship between individual-difference variables and the retrieval practice effect. We illustrate the application of this approach using data from a study that measured fluid intelligence. Future studies may benefit from contrasting different strength-based frameworks.

Children's Retrieval of Science Facts: The Role of Hints and Confidence.

The effortful process of retrieving information from memory has been established as an effective strategy for improving student learning. However, we have a limited understanding of the development of retrieval practice in children, including contexts that may scaffold its benefit. In the current pre-registered study, we examined whether the use of hints during retrieval practice improved free recall in an online science learning task in 8- to 13-years-olds (N = 77, Nfemales = 36). We found partial evidence supporting the provision of hints as boosting the benefit of retrieval practice. Children's long-term retention of science facts was higher when they received hints during an earlier practice test compared to restudying information, but not compared to a test only condition without hints. Furthermore, we found similar effects across both age and levels of confidence, suggesting that retrieval practice remains stable across these factors.

Concept mapping - increased potential as a retrieval-based task.

Concept mapping is a practical task for enhancing learning performance. Learners usually construct concept maps while studying the learning material or after studying. In the first case, the learning material is available during construction, and learners are less involved in retrieval practice from memory (study-based concept mapping; SCM). In the second case, the learning material is absent during construction, and the learners rely on retrieving information from memory (retrieval-based concept mapping, RCM). RCM is assumed to be associated with lower concept map quality and higher cognitive load but better elaboration and learning performance than SCM. This study investigated how the availability of the learning material influenced these variables in biology classrooms. Unlike other studies, this study provided learners with an authentic learning environment and prior concept mapping training. After the concept mapping training, n = 129 secondary school students were assigned to an SCM or RCM condition in a quasi-experimental design. As expected, students in the RCM condition constructed concept maps of lower quality but outperformed SCM students concerning elaboration activities and learning performance. The perceived intrinsic cognitive load was higher in the RCM condition. The results indicate that using concept mapping as a retrieval practice could support students' learning in biology.

The impact of working memory testing on long-term associative memory.

The long-term fate of to-be-remembered information depends in part on the conditions of initial learning, including mental operations engaged via working memory. However, the mechanistic role of working memory (WM) processes in subsequent episodic memory (EM) remains unclear. Does re-exposure to word-pairs during WM recognition testing improve EM for those associations? Are benefits from WM re-exposure greater after an opportunity for retrieval practice compared to mere re-exposure to the memoranda? These questions are addressed in three experiments (N = 460) designed to assess whether WM-based recognition testing benefits long-term associative memory relative to WM-based restudying. Our results show null or negative benefits of WM recognition testing minutes later when initial WM accuracy was not considered. An EM benefit of WM recognition testing only emerges when the analyses are limited to pairs responded to correctly during WM. However, even when compared with accurate WM recognition, restudying can lead to similar associative EM benefits in specific experimental conditions. Taken together, the present results suggest that while WM re-exposure to studied pairs is beneficial to long-term associative memory, successful retrieval on initial tests may be a necessary but insufficient condition for the emergence of a "WM-based testing effect." We consider these results in relation to several hypotheses proposed to explain the testing effect in long-term memory (LTM). In view of empirical parallels with the LTM testing effect, we propose that similar processes influence the benefits of practice tests administered within the canonical boundaries of WM, suggesting continuities in memory over the short and long term.

Redundancy effect of initial enactment encoding and subsequent testing on memory enhancement: Insights from an electrophysiological study.

Testing is more beneficial for memory retention than restudying the same content. However, the effect of the initial encoding method on the testing effect remains unclear. In this study, a classical testing effect paradigm was employed, along with event-related potentials (ERP), to investigate the electrophysiological processes underlying the effect of enactment encoding on the testing effect. Participants were randomly assigned to the Self-Performed Test (SPT) or Verbalized Test (VT) groups. Both groups underwent three stages: an initial encoding phase, an initial test phase (comprising a source memory task and a restudy task), and a final test phase. During the initial encoding phase, the SPT group encoded action phrases through enactment, while the VT group encoded information through reading. During the initial test phase, the SPT group exhibited superior recognition performance in item memory compared with the VT group. Both groups exhibited significant parietal old/new effects in the source memory task, with only the SPT group displaying parietal positivity during the restudy task. During the final test phase, the behavioral testing effect was exclusively observed in the VT group. Furthermore, the VT group displayed a more pronounced parietal positivity in the test condition compared to the restudy condition, while the parietal positivity between the two conditions was comparable in the SPT group. In summary, the absence of a final behavioral testing effect in the SPT group may be attributed to both enactment and testing primarily enhancing memory performance through recollection-based retrieval, as indicated by the parietal positivity. Consequently, the initial enactment encoding method leaves limited scope for further improvements through subsequent testing. These findings suggest that initial enactment encoding, and subsequent testing may be redundant in improving episodic memory performance.

The role of mediators for the pretesting effect.

Taking a pretest (e.g., smoke - ?) before material is studied (smoke - fog) can improve later recall of that material, compared to material which was initially only studied. The goal of the present study was to evaluate for this pretesting effect the potential role of semantic mediators, i.e., of unstudied information that is semantically related to the study material. In all three experiments, subjects studied weakly associated word pairs (e.g., smoke - fog), half of which received a pretest. Subjects then either completed a recognition test (Experiment 1) or a cued-recall test (Experiments 2 and 3), during which they were presented with both the original study material and never-before-seen semantic mediators that were strongly related to the cue item of a pair (e.g., cigarette). Strikingly, presenting semantic mediators as lures led to higher false alarm rates for mediators following initial pretesting than study only (Experiment 1), and presenting semantic mediators as retrieval cues led to better recall of target items following pretesting than study only (Experiments 2 and 3). We argue that these findings support the elaboration account of the pretesting effect but are difficult to reconcile with other prominent accounts of the effect.

A complementary learning systems model of how sleep moderates retrieval practice effects.

While many theories assume that sleep is critical in stabilizing and strengthening memories, our recent behavioral study (Liu & Ranganath, 2021, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 28[6], 2035-2044) suggests that sleep does not simply stabilize memories. Instead, it plays a more complex role, integrating information across two temporally distinct learning episodes. In the current study, we simulated the results of Liu and Ranganath (2021) using our biologically plausible computational model, TEACH, developed based on the complementary learning systems (CLS) framework. Our model suggests that when memories are activated during sleep, the reduced influence of temporal context establishes connections across temporally separated events through mutual training between the hippocampus and neocortex. In addition to providing a compelling mechanistic explanation for the selective effect of sleep, this model offers new examples of the diverse ways in which the cortex and hippocampus can interact during learning.

Lower constraint testing enhances the testing effect for some contextual details but not others.

INTRODUCTION: Retrieval practice has been shown to be an effective means of learning new information, a memory phenomenon known as the testing effect or the retrieval practice effect. Some work suggests that the magnitude of the testing effect can be enhanced when the test used for retrieval practice uses fewer cues to retrieve previously studied information. It is unclear, however, whether such testing benefits extend to peripheral contextual details associated with studied materials (e.g., location where stimuli appear, font color in which items are presented, etc.). In this experiment, we examine both item memory (i.e., memory for the studied items) and context memory under conditions where the intervening test offers fewer cues (i.e., lower constraint) compared to more cues (higher constraint) to better understand item and context memory testing effects. METHODS: Participants first studied word pairs presented in one of eight locations as well as in either red or green font color. Then, in the re-exposure phase, participants processed materials in two types of intervening tests (lower constraint and a higher constraint test) as well as in a restudy condition, before a final memory test. RESULTS: For item memory, results showed that memory was better in the lower constraint testing condition compared to both the higher constraint testing condition as well as the restudy (control) condition. For context memory, results indicated improved memory for location context under lower constraint testing compared to both higher constraint testing and restudy conditions. There was no difference in memory, however, for color context across all conditions. CONCLUSION: Overall, these findings suggest that providing fewer cues to aid retrieval in the intervening test can induce better memory for both items as well as some contextual details.

Buildup and release from proactive interference: The forward testing effect in children's spatial memory.

Previous work has indicated that testing can enhance memory for subsequently studied new information by reducing proactive interference from previously studied information. Here, we examined this forward testing effect in children's spatial memory. Kindergartners (5-6 years) and younger (7-8 years) and older (9-10 years) elementary school children studied four successively presented 3 × 3 arrays, each composed of the same 9 objects. The children were asked to memorize the locations of the objects that differed across the four arrays. Following presentation of each of the first three arrays, memory for the object locations of the respective array was tested (testing condition) or the array was re-presented for additional study (restudy condition). Results revealed that testing Arrays 1 to 3 enhanced children's object location memory for Array 4 relative to restudying. Moreover, children in the testing condition were less likely to confuse Array 4 locations with previous locations, suggesting that testing reduces the buildup of proactive interference. Both effects were found regardless of age. Thus, the current findings indicate that testing is an effective means to resolve proactive interference and, in this way, to enhance children's learning and remembering of spatial information even before the time of school entry.

The influence of repeated study and repeated testing on the testing effect and the transfer effect over time.

Many studies have shown that compared to the restudy condition (RS), retrieval practice (RP) enhances the long-retention memory of retrieved items (i.e., the testing effect), and facilitates later memory of non-retrieved but related items (i.e., the transfer effect). However, previous studies have usually used repeated study and repeated testing, which are included in study-testing cycles. Therefore, it is unclear to what extent the factors of repeated study and repeated testing influence testing and transfer effects over time. In this study, participants studied sentences that described various episodes, then tested a half subset of the original sentences under three conditions (RP, RS, control). After retention intervals of 10 min, 1 day and 7 days, they recalled all of the information in the sentences. The results showed that the testing effect was enhanced by repeated study or repeated testing, while the transfer effect occurred only after both repeated study and repeated testing. Furthermore, repeated study or repeated testing slowed down the forgetting of retrieved items, while the forgetting of non-retrieved items occurred after both repeated study and repeated testing. The testing effect increased over time, but the transfer effect remained relatively stable over time. These results clarified different roles of multiple study repetitions and testing opportunities in the testing effect and the transfer effect, and suggest that the repeated retrieval could be combined with repeated study to optimally promote long-term retention of the memory of tested and non-tested items.

Is practice good enough? Retrieval benefits students with ADHD but does not compensate for poor encoding in unmedicated students.

Introduction: A significant proportion of currently enrolled college students receive support for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and these students are often at risk of academic failure. Retrieval practice or self-testing is an effective, accessible, and affordable tool for improving academic performance. Three recent studies found conflicting results with regards to the effectiveness of retrieval practice in this population. Methods: The present study compared 36 individuals with ADHD to 36 controls. Participants studied Swahili-English word pairs that varied in difficulty. Half of the pairs were repeatedly studied, and the other half repeatedly tested. Results: On a final test, all participants showed a benefit of retrieval practice relative to restudy and participant status did not moderate the effect. However, unmedicated individuals with ADHD performed worse overall, both during the encoding phase and on the final test, whereas medicated participants were not significantly different from controls. Discussion: An examination of self-reported encoding strategies found unmedicated participants used fewer deep strategies at encoding, consistent with prior work on ADHD and memory. Although retrieval practice is effective in this group, improved strategy use may be necessary to ensure performance that is fully equivalent to that of students without ADHD.

Cognitive perspectives on maintaining physicians' medical expertise: IV. Best practices and open questions in using testing to enhance learning and retention.

Although tests and assessments-such as those used to maintain a physician's Board certification-are often viewed merely as tools for decision-making about one's performance level, strong evidence now indicates that the experience of being tested is a powerful learning experience in its own right: The act of retrieving targeted information from memory strengthens the ability to use it again in the future, known as the testing effect. We review meta-analytic evidence for the learning benefits of testing, including in the domain of medicine, and discuss theoretical accounts of its mechanism(s). We also review key moderators-including the timing, frequency, order, and format of testing and the content of feedback-and what they indicate about how to most effectively use testing for learning. We also identify open questions for the optimal use of testing, such as the timing of feedback and the sequencing of complex knowledge domains. Lastly, we consider how to facilitate adoption of this powerful study strategy by physicians and other learners.

Test Experience, Direct Instruction, and Their Combination Promote Accurate Beliefs about the Testing Effect.

Practice testing is a highly robust learning strategy that promotes long-term retention, especially in comparison to more passive strategies such as restudying-a finding referred to as the testing effect. However, learners do not always appreciate the memorial benefits of practice testing over restudying, which could limit their use of practice testing during self-regulated learning. The current investigation explored the extent to which learners' metacognitive judgments about the testing effect can be improved via test experience, direct instruction, or a combination of both techniques. Prolific participants underwent two learning cycles. In the first cycle, participants were randomly assigned to either (a) experience a testing effect in their own memory performance (i.e., study unrelated word pairs, practice half the pairs through restudying and half through testing with correct-answer feedback, complete a critical test on the pairs, and receive feedback regarding their performance after using each strategy); (b) imagine they had to learn word pairs and read a passage on the purported benefits of practice testing; or (c) undergo both procedures. In the second cycle, all participants learned a novel set of word pairs. Across both learning cycles, participants estimated memory performance for material learned through testing versus restudying. Both test experience and direct instruction-independently and in combination-led to more accurate memory estimates across learning cycles, but no technique was more effective than the other. In summary, people can learn about the memorial benefits of practice testing when they experience a testing effect on their own memory performance and/or when they receive instruction about its benefits.

Performance feedback enhances test-potentiated encoding.

Introduction: Long-term memory retention is enhanced after testing compared to restudying (testing effect). Notably, memory retrieval further improves when correct-answer feedback is provided after the retrieval attempt (test-potentiated encoding-TPE). Methods: To evaluate whether explicit positive or negative feedback further enhances memory performance beyond the effect of TPE, in two experiments additional explicit positive or negative performance-contingent feedback was presented before providing correct-answer feedback. After an initial exposure to the full material, 40 participants learned 210 weakly associated cue-target word pairs by either restudying or testing (Experiment 1). Depending on the accuracy of the retrieval attempt, the tested word pairs were followed by positive or negative performance feedback (50%) or no feedback (50%). Irrespective of the type of repetition, trials were followed by a restudy opportunity. Participants returned to perform a final cued-recall test (Day 2). Results: Final test results replicated the testing effect (better memory performance for tested compared to restudied items). Explicit performance feedback in addition to correct-answer feedback increased retrieval performance, but only on Day 2. This pattern of results was replicated in Experiment 2 in an independent sample of 25 participants. To assess the specific effects of learning history, we also examined retrieval accuracy and reaction times during repetition cycles: Explicit feedback improved retrieval for material successfully encoded in the initial study phase (consistent positive feedback) as well as for material learned during the repetition phase (mixed positive and negative feedback). Discussion: Performance feedback improves learning beyond the effects of retrieval practice and correct-answer feedback, suggesting that it strengthens memory representations and promotes re-encoding of the material.

The pretesting effect thrives in the presence of competing information.

Taking a pretest (e.g., blanket - ?) before some target material (blanket - sheet) is studied can promote recall of that material on a subsequent final test compared to material which was initially only studied. Here, we examine whether such pretesting can shield the tested material from interference-induced forgetting, which often occurs when before final testing, related material is encountered. We applied a typical pretesting task but asked subjects, between acquisition and final testing of the target list (list 1), to study two additional lists of items with either completely new and unique pairs (e.g., atom - cell) or overlapping - and thus potentially interfering - pairs (e.g., blanket - sleep). Target-list recall on the final test showed a typical pretesting effect for unique pairs, but the size of the effect even increased for overlapping pairs, as recall of study-only pairs was impaired, whereas recall of pretest pairs was left largely unaffected. This held regardless of whether a low (Experiment 1) or high (Experiment 2) degree of learning was induced for the interfering material, suggesting that pretesting can indeed protect the tested material from interference. These findings indicate that pretesting could play a significant role in educational settings where information often needs to be retained in the presence of competing information.

Transitive inference and the testing effect: Retrieval practice impairs transitive inference.

There is substantial interest in the extent to which the testing effect (the finding that retrieval practice enhances memory) extends to more complex forms of learning, especially those entailing greater element interactivity. Transitive inference (TI) requires just such interactivity, in which information must be combined across multiple learning elements or premises to extract an underlying structure. Picklesimer et al. provided preliminary evidence that retrieval practice fails to enhance, and actually disrupts, TI. This study assessed the generality of that result. The current experiments employed a seven- or eight-element TI paradigm in which participants initially learned a set of premise pairs (e.g., A > B, B > C, and C > D) and then engaged in either restudy or retrieval practice of the premise pairs before taking a final test that assessed memory for the original premise pairs and one's ability to make TIs (e.g., to infer that B > D). Experiments 1 and 2 used pictorial materials and simultaneous presentation of premises during learning, a form of presentation that has induced testing effects on other forms of inference. For TI, the results were unchanged from Picklesimer et al.-TI was worse for retrieval practice than restudy. Experiment 3 used verbal materials and likewise found worse TI for retrieval practice. A small-scale meta-analysis combining the current experiments with those of Picklesimer et al. revealed a significant negative testing effect on TI (d = -0.37). Although retrieval practice enhances many aspects of memory, this fundamental aspect of human reasoning may be impaired by retrieval practice.

The test-retest reliability of the retrieval practice effect.

Retrieving information from memory, compared with different control conditions, improves subsequent retention of that information. Given the ubiquitous demonstration of this retrieval practice effect, researchers have asked whether such benefit is moderated by individual-difference variables. An implicit assumption in individual-difference research is that the retrieval practice effect at the participant level is reliable across participants. In this study, we tested this reliability assumption. In two sessions, 54 participants studied foreign-native word pairs, repeatedly restudied half of the word pairs, repeatedly retrieval-practised the other half, and, finally, took a final test for all pairs. Different word pairs were used in each session. We replicated the retrieval practice effect at the group level in Sessions 1 (d = 0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.27, 0.80]) and 2 (d = 0.79 [0.53, 1.05]). In addition, we found that the retrieval practice effect at the participant level was reliable over a 1-week span both for absolute agreement, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = .33 [.12, .51], and for consistency estimates, ICC = .35 [.14, .53]. The result bridges a gap in the literature of individual differences on the retrieval practice effect. We suggest that future studies identify whether, and under which experimental conditions, the retrieval practice effect at the participant level may show even greater reliability estimates than the ones reported here. The finding may also pave the way for studies assessing whether the magnitude of the retrieval practice effect is domain-general or paradigm-specific.

How retrieval practice and semantic generation affect subsequently studied material: an analysis of item-level effects.

The forward testing effect (FTE) refers to the finding that retrieval practice of previously studied material can facilitate recall of newly studied (critical) material. Such interim retrieval practice can also lead to a differential FTE, i.e., a more pronounced FTE for items at early than later serial positions in the critical material. The present study examined whether this differential FTE also holds with interim semantic generation of extra-list items, and whether it is influenced by study material. Consistent with prior work, the results of two experiments showed that both interim retrieval practice and interim semantic generation induce the general (list-level) FTE when unrelated study lists are applied, whereas retrieval practice only creates the effect with categorised study lists. Critically, however, the differential FTE was present in response to retrieval practice but absent in response to semantic generation. This pattern held regardless of which material was studied, thus experimentally dissociating the general (list-level) from the differential (item-level) FTE. The findings may suggest that retrieval practice, but not semantic generation, induces a reset of the encoding process which promotes attentional encoding such that a more pronounced FTE arises for early than middle and late serial positions in the critical list.

Functional underpinnings of feedback-enhanced test-potentiated encoding.

The testing effect describes the finding that retrieval practice enhances memory performance compared to restudy practice. Prior evidence demonstrates that this effect can be boosted by providing feedback after retrieval attempts (i.e. test-potentiated encoding [TPE]). The present fMRI study investigated the neural processes during successful memory retrieval underlying this beneficial effect of correct answer feedback compared with restudy and whether additional performance feedback leads to further benefits. Twenty-seven participants learned cue-target pairs by (i) restudying, (ii) standard TPE including a restudy opportunity, or (iii) TPE including a restudy opportunity immediately after a positive or negative performance feedback. One day later, a cued retrieval recognition test was performed inside the MRI scanner. Behavioral results confirmed the testing effect and that adding explicit performance feedback-enhanced memory relative to restudy and standard TPE. Stronger functional engagement while retrieving items previously restudied was found in lateral prefrontal cortex and superior parietal lobe. By contrast, lateral temporo-parietal areas were more strongly recruited while retrieving items previously tested. Performance feedback increased the hippocampal activation and resulted in stronger functional coupling between hippocampus, supramarginal gyrus, and ventral striatum with lateral temporo-parietal cortex. Our results unveil the main functional dynamics and connectivity nodes underlying memory benefits from additional performance feedback.