Jump to content

Forward testing effect

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ACDragon2000 (talk | contribs) at 03:26, 21 May 2019. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Not to be confused with the Testing Effect.

Part of a series on
Psychology
Basic psychology
Applied psychology
Concepts
Lists

The Forward Testing Effect, also known as test potentiated new learning, is a psychological learning theory which suggests that testing old information can improve learning of new information.[1] Unlike traditional learning theories in educational psychology which have established the positive effect testing has when later attempting to retrieve the same information,[2] the Forward Testing Effect instead suggests that the testing experience itself includes unique benefits which enhance the learning of new information.

Hence, this memory effect is also distinct from the 'practice effect' which typically refers to an observed improvement which results from repetition and restudy.[3] Instead, this theory suggests that testing serves not only as a tool for assessment but as a learning tool. The Forward Testing Effect indicates that educators should encourage students to study using testing techniques rather than restudying information repeatedly.

Empirical Evidence

Word Recall

Experimental design for Chan, Manley, Davis and Szpunar's (2018) experiment.[4]

The earliest documented study to observe the Forward Testing Effect was conducted in 1974 by Tulving and Watkins.[5] They observed that testing of one list of words enhanced recall of another, different list. At this point in time, the Forward Testing Effect had not yet been theorised, hence they were quite puzzled with their discovery which sparked further research by other psychologists. Further studies involving word pairs conducted by Szpunar, McDermott and Roediger[6] in 2008 and Wahlheim[7] in 2015 reported similar findings that participants who were tested on one word list performed significantly better in a recall task for a completely different list, relative to those who only restudied the first list or performed a filler task.

The most recent word-based experiment which confirmed these findings was conducted by Chan, Manley, Davis and Szpunar[8] in 2018. They specifically investigated whether The Forward Testing Effect persisted across different time delays. In their experiment, three word lists were studied by participants. There were three groups; the participants either restudied these words, completed math problems or were tested on the words. Participants were then given a fourth word list and completed a free recall test. They found that those who had been tested on Lists 1-3 had better recall for List 4 across varying time delays.

File:University lecture room.png
Students watching a lecture in a lecture theatre.

Overall these studies provided strong evidence to suggest that integrated testing of word-lists not only aided recall of the same word list but boosted later learning.

Visual Recall

Several studies have been conducted on The Forward Testing Effect for students watching video lectures. In 2013, Szpunar, Khan and Schacter,[9] conducted a study involving video lectures. They found that students who watched lectures which included interpolated testing aided new learning, scoring higher on a final cumulative quiz. In addition, these students were observed to have reduced mind-wandering and more content-relevant thoughts throughout the lecture. Another study conducted by Jing, Szpunar and Schacter[10] in 2016 found that participants who were tested throughout a video lecture performed far better on a cumulative test at the end of the lecture than those who weren't tested.

These experiments demonstrated the benefits of testing in a more ecologically valid setting, suggesting that university professors should consider implementing testing within their lectures through electronic testing programs such as Kahoot and Mentimeter.

Theoretical Accounts

There are three theoretical accounts which attempt to explain The Forward Testing Effect; the context change account, elaborative retrieval account and, more recently, the episodic context account.

Context Change Account

The context change account suggests that The Forward Testing Effect can be attributed to the change in context as the learner switches from encoding information to retrieval during testing. This account draws from the considerable evidence in favour of the existence of proactive interference as a part of interference theory, primarily from a study conducted by Jang and Huber in 2008.[11] This study found that proactive interference occurs when the learner's ability to encode new information is inhibited by previous learning due to an extended study period.[12] Testing of old learning provides a release from proactive interference by switching the focus of the learner's cognitive activity from memory encoding to retrieval.

However, this account has been criticised as it is considered limited in its ability to explain the Forward Testing Effect since it implies that testing is no different from taking a study break; as long as a context change is enacted, testing has no unique benefits to learning. However, all of the aforementioned studies have demonstrated that participants who are given a 'filler task', which provides a break from encoding, do not experience the Forward Testing Effect. This limits the validity of this account as a way to explain the Forward Testing Effect.

Elaborative Retrieval Account

The elaborative retrieval account suggests that the encoding of semantic cues through testing is responsible for the Forward Testing Effect. This account is the most frequently cited when referring to the Forward Testing Effect as several studies have supported the concept of semantic cues as a tool to aid memory recall.[13] In Chan, Manley, Davis and Szpunar[14] study (2018), they not only found evidence for the Forward Testing Effect across time delays but they also found strong semantic organisation among participants who experienced this effect. They subsequently concluded that these participants' enhanced performance could be attributed to their use of semantic memory cues and organisation strategies which were encoded throughout testing and retrieved when they completed the final recall task.

Further evidence for this account


Episodic Context Account


Criticisms

References

  1. ^ Chan, J. C., Manley, K. D., Davis, S. D., & Szpunar, K. K. (2018). Testing potentiates new learning across a retention interval and a lag: A strategy change perspective. Journal of Memory and Language,102, 83-96. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2018.05.007
  2. ^ Roediger, H. L., III, & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). Test-enhanced learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17, 249–255. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x
  3. ^ "APA Dictionary of Psychology". dictionary.apa.org. Retrieved 2019-05-14.
  4. ^ Chan J. C. K., Manley K. D., Davis S. D., Szpunar K. K. (2018). Testing potentiates new learning across a retention interval and a lag: A strategy change perspective. Journal of Memory and Language, 102, 83–96. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2018.05.007
  5. ^ Tulving, E., & Watkins, M. J. (1974). On negative transfer: Effects of testing one list on the recall of another. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 181–193.
  6. ^ Szpunar, K. K., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). Testing during study insulates against the buildup of proactive interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34(6), 1392–1399. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ a0013082.
  7. ^ Wahlheim, C. N. (2015). Testing can counteract proactive interference by integrating competing information. Memory & Cognition, 43(1), 27–38. http://dx.doi.org/10. 3758/s13421-014-0455-5.
  8. ^ Chan J. C. K., Manley K. D., Davis S. D., Szpunar K. K. (2018). Testing potentiates new learning across a retention interval and a lag: A strategy change perspective. Journal of Memory and Language, 102, 83–96. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2018.05.007
  9. ^ Szpunar, K. K., Khan, N. Y., & Schacter, D. L. (2013). Interpolated memory tests reduce mind wandering and improve learning of online lectures. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110, 6313–6317. http://dx.doi. org/10.1073/pnas.1221764110/-/DCSupplemental/pnas.201221764SI.pdf.
  10. ^ Jing, H. G., Szpunar, K. K., & Schacter, D. L. (2016). Interpolated testing influences focused attention and improves integration of information during a video-recorded lecture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 22(3), 305–318. http://dx.doi. org/10.1037/xap0000087.
  11. ^ Jang, Y., & Huber, D. E. (2008). Context retrieval and context change in free recall: Recalling from long-term memory drives list isolation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 112–127. https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.34.1.112
  12. ^ "APA Dictionary of Psychology". dictionary.apa.org. Retrieved 2019-05-16.
  13. ^ Pyc, M. A., & Rawson, K. A. (2010). Why testing improves memory: Mediator effectiveness hypothesis. Science, 330, 335. https://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1191465
  14. ^ Chan J. C. K., Manley K. D., Davis S. D., Szpunar K. K. (2018). Testing potentiates new learning across a retention interval and a lag: A strategy change perspective. Journal of Memory and Language, 102, 83–96. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2018.05.007

Category:Memory Category:Psychology Category:Learning theory (education)


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Forward_testing_effect&oldid=898058999"