Metacognitive control over the distribution of retrieval practice with and without feedback and the efficacy of learners
- PDF / 487,055 Bytes
- 13 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 34 Downloads / 171 Views
Metacognitive control over the distribution of retrieval practice with and without feedback and the efficacy of learners’ spacing choices Thomas C. Toppino 1 & Matthew J. Pagano 1 Accepted: 15 September 2020 # The Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2020
Abstract In two experiments on self-regulated learning, participants studied word pairs, made judgments of learning (JOLs), and decided whether to continue practicing after a long or short spacing interval prior to a final cued-recall test. When practice involved restudying, learners preferred a long spacing interval. However, when retrieval practice was involved, learners preferred a short spacing interval for items with low and medium JOLs and a long interval for high-JOL items, regardless of whether retrieval practice was followed by feedback or not. Taking retrieval practice after a short rather than a long spacing interval was efficacious when no feedback followed practice tests, leading to superior recall. Given that retrieval practice was successful, a long spacing interval led to better recall than a short one, but learners were insufficiently accurate in determining which items should be given a long spacing interval for this strategy to be effective. Presenting feedback after retrieval practice did not alter learners’ spacing strategy, and the frequent selection of short spacing intervals impaired subsequent recall. Keywords Metacognition . Retrieval practice . Spacing effect . Testing effect
Introduction Learning and retention of information improve with repeated practice (Ebbinghaus, 1885/1964). There is a wealth of evidence, however, that memory performance generally improves with increases in the temporal interval separating successive practice opportunities, although performance may decline again if the spacing interval becomes too long (Cepeda, Pashler, Vul, Wixted, & Rohrer, 2006). This phenomenon is often called the spacing effect or the distributed-practice effect (for a review, see Toppino & Gerbier, 2014). It occurs both when repetitions involve additional study opportunities (e.g., Madigan, 1969; Melton, 1970) and when they involve tests affording retrieval practice (e.g., Carpenter & DeLosh, 2005; Modigliani, 1976; Whitten & Bjork, 1977). The potent influence of spacing on learning and retention has led to an interest in the degree to which people recognize its effectiveness and in the extent to which they use spacing as
* Thomas C. Toppino [email protected] 1
Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Villanova University, 800 Lancaster Avenue, Villanova, PA 19085, USA
a metacognitive control strategy in self-regulated learning. Learners seem to have limited awareness of the benefits of spacing, even after they have finished practicing. If learners are asked to predict their later memory performance after engaging in massed or spaced practice, they correctly predict better memory for spaced items when there is a delay between practice and making predictions (e.g., Dunlosky & Nelson, 1994), but not when predictions are made immedia
Data Loading...
