Learners can study foreign language-English vocabulary (e.g., denken - to think) both receptively and productively. Receptive learning involves being cued with a foreign language word (e.g., denken) and trying to translate it (i.e., to think). Productive learning involves being cued with an English word (e.g., to think) and trying to produce the translation. When students use retrieval practice to learn foreign-language translations in one direction (e.g., receptively) until they correctly recall the translation, do they demonstrate transfer in the other direction (i.e., productively)? Across three experiments, we answered this question by manipulating the order of learning schedule (reception first followed by production or vice versa). For a given schedule, participants continued to practice retrieving translations (with feedback) using the dropout method until they correctly recalled each translation three times; they then proceeded to practice the pairs in the opposite direction until they correctly recalled each translation three times. Across all experiments, transfer was partial (learning in one direction did not entirely eliminate the need to practice in the other), but transfer did occur regardless of which schedule students used first during practice.

Declarative concepts are abstract concepts denoted by key terms and short definitions that can be applied in a variety of scenarios (e.g., positive reinforcement in psychology; Rawson et al., 2015). One common learning goal for declarative concepts is to instill knowledge that students can use to support the application of content in novel scenarios. Given theoretical perspectives and empirical evidence from related literatures, one promising approach for supporting declarative concept application is learning examples. The purpose of the current research was to evaluate the utility of using examples as primary targets of learning for declarative concept application. In two experiments, participants read a textbook passage that included the definition and an example of 10 declarative concepts. Participants then learned the target material by recalling either the definition or the example of each concept. Across both experiments, declarative concept application was greater following practice focused on learning examples versus definitions. Results suggest that using this strategy may be an effective technique for supporting the application of definitions, which are foundational to many introductory courses. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Multiple-choice practice tests are beneficial for learning, and students encounter multiple-choice questions regularly. How do students regulate their use of multiple-choice practice testing? And, how effective is students’ use of multiple-choice practice testing? In the current experiments, undergraduate participants practiced German-English word pairs. Students started with an initial study trial for each pair. Then, they had the options to restudy an item, take a practice test, or remove it from further practice. For comparison to students’ use of multiple-choice practice questions, we included a second self-regulated group that had access to cued-recall practice questions. Participants chose to complete multiple-choice questions until they correctly answered each item about one time during practice, similar to students’ use of cued-recall questions. We also included experimenter-controlled groups in which participants completed practice tests until they reached a higher number of correct answers during practice. As compared to the experimenter-controlled groups, participants who regulated their use of multiple-choice questions scored lower on final tests but also spent less time practicing items. Thus, when considering final test performance in relation to time spent practicing, students’ choices to use multiple-choice practice questions to about one correct answer per item was comparatively effective.

Successive relearning involves practicing a task until it is performed correctly and then practicing it again until it is performed correctly during other spaced practice sessions. Despite its widespread use outside of education, few students use this approach to obtain and maintain knowledge in formal educational settings. We review evidence that demonstrates its potency and emphasize how investigations of successive relearning will shift research agendas away from single-session studies in which time on task is fixed toward studies involving multiple practice sessions in which time on task is tailored for students and is treated as an outcome variable of interest. Doing so arguably will align the outcomes of cognitive-education research with real-world learning objectives by revealing not only the benefits of using successive relearning (or any learning technique) but also the time required to obtain those benefits.

Retrieval practice is beneficial for both easy-to-learn and difficult-to-learn materials, but scant research has examined students’ use of self-testing for items of varying difficulty. In two experiments, we investigated whether students differentially regulate their use of self-testing for easy and difficult items and assessed the effectiveness of students’ self-regulated choices. Undergraduate participants learned normatively easy and normatively difficult Lithuanian-English word pair translations. After an initial study trial, participants in the self-regulated learning groups chose whether they wanted to restudy an item, take a practice test, or remove an item from further practice. Participants chose to test items repeatedly while learning but dropped both easy and difficult items after reaching a criterion of about one correct recall per item. Consequently, final test performance 2 days later was lower for difficult items versus easy items, and performance was lower in the self-regulated learning group than in an experimenter-controlled comparison group (in Experiment 1). In Experiment 2, we tested hypotheses for why participants reached a similar number of correct recalls for both easy and difficult items. Three new groups included different scaffolds aimed at minimizing potential barriers to effective regulation. These scaffolds did not change participants’ learning choices, and as a result, performance on difficult items was still lower than on easy items. Importantly, participants planned to continue practicing items beyond one correct recall and believed that an optimal student should practice difficult items more than easy items, but they did not execute this plan during the learning task.

Objective: Little research has addressed the treatment of lexical-semantic comprehension deficits (i.e., difficulty retrieving the meanings of words) in people with aphasia (PWA). Research suggests that practice retrieving names for depicted objects from long-term memory (production-based retrieval practice) more strongly benefits word retrieval for production in PWA compared to errorless learning (i.e., word repetition), which eschews retrieval practice. This study assessed whether production-based and comprehension-based retrieval practice enhance performance on errorful word-comprehension items in PWA measured relative to nonretrieval forms of training and untrained control items. Method: In a within-participant group study of PWA, errorful comprehension items were assigned to (a) a production-based training module (retrieval practice vs. errorless learning); (b) a comprehension-based training module (a receptive form of retrieval practice vs. restudy). Each module comprised one training session and a 1-day and 1-week comprehension posttest on the module's trained items and an untrained item set. Results: The comprehension module conditions produced similar and superior posttest performance relative to untrained items. Both production module conditions improved posttest performance relative to untrained items, with retrieval practice conferring more durable learning and generalization indicative of refinement of semantic representations compared to errorless learning. Conclusions: Results suggest comprehension- and production-based forms of training are both beneficial for improving lexical-semantic deficits in aphasia, with production-based retrieval practice conferring additional benefits to the targeted deficit compared to errorless learning. Future studies should examine these learning factors in schedules of training more commensurate with clinical practice and in other neurological populations (e.g., semantic dementia).

Successive relearning involves practicing to-be-learned content until a designated level of mastery is achieved in each of multiple practice sessions. As compared with practicing the content to the same criterion in a single session, successive relearning has been shown to dramatically boost students' retention of simple verbal materials. Does the documented potency of successive relearning extend to the learning of mathematical procedures? Across three experiments, 431 college students read instructions about how to solve four types of probability problems and were then presented with isomorphic practice problems until they correctly solved three problems of each type. In the successive relearning group, students engaged in practice until one problem of each type was correctly solved in each of three different practice sessions. In the single-session group, students engaged in practice until three problems of each type were correctly solved in a single practice session. Both groups completed a final test involving novel problems 1 week after the end of practice. When an effect size was estimated across all experiments, final test performance showed a significant but only small advantage of successive relearning over single-session learning (pooled d = 0.28, 95% CI = 0.08, 0.49). Secondary analyses revealed that correctly solving a problem did not significantly boost the likelihood of subsequent success, which also could explain the relatively low level of test performance for both groups. These outcomes identify a potential boundary condition for the benefits of using successive relearning to enhance student achievement when learning mathematical procedures.

This study examined how the distribution and amount of practice affect word retrieval in aphasia as well as how such factors relate to the efficiency of learning. The central hypothesis was that factors that enhance the learning of new knowledge also enhance persistent access to existing, but inconsistently available, word representations. The study evaluated the impact of learning principles on word retrieval by manipulating the timing and amount of retrievals for items presented for naming. Nine people with chronic aphasia with naming impairment completed the experiment. Training materials involved proper noun entities assigned to six conditions formed by crossing a 2-level factor of spacing of sessions, i.e., intersession interval (1 day versus 7 days between sessions) with a 3-level factor of number of correct retrievals per item per session, i.e., criterion level (Criterion-1, Criterion-2, and Criterion-4). Each intersession interval condition comprised three training sessions and a one-month retention test. Increasing the criterion level enhanced naming performance after short (1 day, 7 days) and long (one month) retention intervals, but these advantages came at the cost of many additional training trials. In most cases, later naming success was superior when the same number of correct retrievals of an item was distributed across multiple sessions rather than administered within one session. The substantial advantages for across-session spacing were gained at little cost in terms of additional training trials. At one-month retention, naming accuracy was numerically but not significantly higher in the 7-day versus 1-day intersession interval condition. Implications for theories of lexical access and naming treatment in aphasia are discussed.

Almost anything worth doing takes effort, so it is no surprise that effort has played such a central role in how researchers, theoreticians, instructors, and even students think about student learning and achievement. In this special issue, the authors of the target articles explore the importance of effort to students' self-regulated learning within multiple domains. To further support research progress on effort, we distinguish between objective effort as a direct causal agent of learning gains and effort as a student perception. We argue that understanding effort as a student perception shows promise for discovering ways to improve self-regulated learning and student achievement. In developing these arguments, we consider the contribution of the target articles to five themes relevant to metacognitively driven self-regulated learning, with the aim of fostering progressive research programs aimed at revealing the potential roles of effort in student achievement.

It is uncontroversial in psychological research that different schedules of practice, which govern the distribution of practice over time, can promote radically different outcomes in terms of gains in performance and durability of learning. In contrast, in speech–language treatment research, there is a critical need for well-controlled studies examining the impact of distribution of treatment on efficacy. In this article, we enumerate key findings from psychological research on learning and memory regarding how different schedules of practice differentially confer durable learning. We review existing studies of aphasia treatment with a focus on naming impairment that have examined how the distribution of practice affects treatment efficacy. We close by discussing potential productive lines of research to elaborate the clinical applicability of distributed practice principles to language treatment.

Undergraduate students with ADHD may benefit from retrieval practice but may have difficulty using this strategy consistently. We examined whether undergraduates with ADHD benefit as much as non-ADHD students from self-regulated retrieval practice and retrieval practice to criterion. Students with ADHD (n = 58) and without (n = 121) learned key term definitions by studying, practicing retrieval, and judging the accuracy of their responses using a computer interface. One group self regulated their learning; the other learned items to criterion of three correct retrievals. After one week, recall and recognition were as high for students with ADHD as those without ADHD, regardless of whether students regulated their learning or were forced to achieve criterion. Among those who regulated their learning, students with and without ADHD used retrieval practice and feedback to a similar degree. Results support recommending retrieval practice to criterion for college students with and without ADHD.

Successive relearning combines two effective learning techniques (retrieval practice and spaced practice) and involves practicing retrieval until some level of mastery has been reached (i.e., at least one correct retrieval attempt) in each of multiple sessions. Several laboratory studies have demonstrated the promise of successive relearning for enhancing student learning, but attempts to evaluate its effectiveness in authentic educational contexts are limited. In the current research, we implemented successive relearning in a difficult biopsychology course to examine its effectiveness at enhancing student learning on a high-stakes exam. Students successively relearned some course content via a virtual flashcard program, whereas other course content was learned with business-as-usual activities. In two experiments, successive relearning boosted students' learning of course content by at least 10% (with ds ranging from 0.54 to 1.10). These findings suggest that implementing successive relearning in courses can be an effective method of promoting student achievement.

Textbooks currently include many elaborations that describe, illustrate, and explain main ideas, increasing the length of these textbook chapters. The current study investigated if the cost in additional reading time that these elaborations impose is outweighed by benefits to memory for main ideas. Given that elaborations in textbooks sometimes fail to produce memory benefits, the current study also investigated if the reason is that less time is spent reading main ideas sentences in elaborated versus unelaborated texts. In two experiments, participants read a textbook passage with just the main ideas or with these main ideas and elaborations. Two days later, participants completed tests of their memory for the main ideas. Conceptually replicating previous research, elaborations did not provide a memory benefit commensurate with the time cost they imposed. Results also indicated that the lack of benefit is at least partially attributable to less time spent reading main ideas for the elaborated versus unelaborated text. To further investigate why students spent less time on main idea sentences, Experiment 2 provided evidence that this difference may be due to difficulty discriminating main ideas from elaborations while reading. In sum, textbook elaborations may impair memory for main ideas due to less time spent on these main ideas despite the large overall time cost imposed; thus elaborated texts can be less effective than unelaborated texts.

Interleaved practice involves studying exemplars from different categories in a non-systematic, pseudorandom order under the constraint that no two exemplars from the same category are presented consecutively. Interleaved practice of materials has been shown to enhance test performance compared to blocked practice in which exemplars from the same category are studied together. Why does interleaved practice produce this benefit? We evaluated two non-mutually exclusive hypotheses, the discriminative-contrast hypothesis and the distributed-practice hypothesis, by testing participants' performance on calculating the volume of three-dimensional geometric shapes. In Experiment 1, participants repeatedly practiced calculating the volume of four different-sized shapes according to blocked practice, interleaved practice, or remote-interleaved practice (which involved alternating the practice of volume calculation with non-volume problems, like permutations and fraction addition). Standard interleaving enhanced performance compared to blocked practice but did not produce enhanced performance compared to remote interleaving. In Experiment 2, we replicated this pattern and extended the results to include a remote-blocked group, which involved blocking volume calculation with non-volume problems. Performance on key measures was better for remote-interleaved groups compared to remote-blocked groups, a finding that supports the distributed-practice hypothesis.

Book summary page views Book summary page views help Close Book summary page views help Book summary views reflect the number of visits to the book and chapter landing pages. Total views: 0 * Loading metrics...

Formal education has had a major and positive impact on society, but it is also true that not all students meet their learning aspirations. Many children and adults struggle to learn and many are left behind. The problems that undermine their efforts to succeed (and instructors' efforts to help them) arise from numerous sources; a short list includes poor nutrition, poor physical or mental health, a lack of motivation, boredom, social and interpersonal problems at school or at home, ineffective approaches to learning, learning disabilities, and poor access to educational resources. Successfully solving these problems will require many solutions and only a subset of them are targeted by cognitive psychologists. This subset of problems is nevertheless fundamental to education and, in general, includes the difficulties that many students have in effectively learning and understanding new ideas and concepts, correcting misconceptions, achieving proficiency in math and reading, and thinking critically. Even in the best of circumstances, many students will still struggle, and many of the efforts of cognitive and educational psychologists - and certainly those represented in this handbook - are aimed at helping students more effectively learn and teachers more effectively teach.

Students rely on their notes to memorise and learn critical course content, and recent studies of note-taking state that most students take notes, citing a survey published in 1974. Over the past four decades, classrooms and note-taking technologies have evolved: students can take notes on electronic devices, and some classes are entirely online. Despite these changes, few studies have investigated their impact on note-taking habits. Given that note-taking is critical for student learning, the purpose of the present study was to update the literature on students' general note-taking behaviour and investigate the impact of these newer technological advances on note-taking. We surveyed 577 college students, using questions from prior surveys and new questions relevant to technology. As per prior studies, students still reported taking notes in classrooms, and as important, students reported flexibility in their note-taking by (a) using a notebook or a laptop depending on course demands and (b) often deciding not to take notes in online courses. Thus, students are flexible in their note-taking behaviour, but may not always make the best decisions about how and when to take notes.

This study investigated the efficacy of the Fluency Development Lesson (FDL) in improving reading achievement in primary grade struggling readers. 30 readers, enrolled in a summer reading clinic, participated in daily 40-min mini-reading lessons across 5 weeks. During the fluency lessons, readers practiced and developed their literacy skills through participation in repeated readings, word work, rehearsal, and performance. Assessments measured comprehension, reading fluency, including word recognition accuracy, reading speed, and prosody. Control students also took the pre- and post-intervention tests; their performance did not change with repeated testing. The Fluency Development Lesson students showed significant gains on all measures.

Textbook passages commonly include elaborations (details supporting main ideas) with the assumption that elaborations will improve learning of the main ideas. However, elaborations increase text length, which subsequently increases the reading time of that text. These observations lead to the two focal questions of interest in the current study: What is the time cost imposed by including elaborations within textbooks? Does the benefit of elaborations for enhancing memory for main ideas outweigh this time cost? In three experiments, students studied elaborated versus unelaborated versions of psychology textbook passages. Two days later, students completed final tests, including cued recall for main ideas and comprehension tests. In all experiments, we found a substantial cost in terms of increased reading time for the elaborated text but no evidence of increased memory for main ideas to offset this cost. To facilitate further interpretation of the similar test performance observed for elaborated versus unelaborated texts, experiment 2 ruled out functional floor or ceiling effects and established that both text versions enhanced learning (but did so to a similar extent). These results indicate that elaborations embedded within textbook passages may not facilitate learning and that unelaborated texts may be more efficient than elaborated texts.