Presentation Title

The Testing Effect Varies with Spaced Versus Massed Learning of Skeletal Muscle Information

Location

Nessmith-Lane Atrium

Session Format

Poster Presentation

Research Area Topic:

Education & Learning - STEM Education

Abstract

Learners who engage in testing or effortful retrieval throughout learning tend to retain more following a delay compared to those who read and reread to-be-learned materials. Additionally, studying sessions that are spaced apart by one or more days tend to promote more recall than do those that are massed together at the same time. Although both the testing and spacing effects are well-established in the cognitive psychology literature, no studies have examined their additive effect with anatomy and physiology information. The purpose of this study was to determine if the benefits of a testing-based strategy vary with massed versus spaced learning sessions. Participants used the following strategies to learn sets of human skeletal muscle information: 1. reading-rereading on three different days (RRRRx3), 2. reading-testing on three different days (RTRTx3), 3. reading-rereading on two different days (RRRRRRx2), 4. reading-testing on two different days (RTRTRTx2) and 5. reading-testing on a single day (RT6x1). The five strategies were standardized so that participants used each for a total of exactly twenty four minutes. The retention of muscle information was assessed via free recall. The results were analyzed using a repeated measures analysis of variance. One week after learning, the assessment scores were 24.10 å± 3.08, 33.74 å± 3.43, 15.47 å± 2.44, 20.56 å± 2.89 and 12.76 å± 2.02 for the RRRRx3, RTRTx3, RRRRRRx2, RTRTRTx2 and RT6x1 strategies, respectively. In conclusion, the more spaced strategies produced significantly better recall than the less spaced strategies, the testing-based strategies produced significantly better recall than reading-only strategies, and the combination of spacing and testing generated the greatest recall of muscle information.

Presentation Type and Release Option

Presentation (Open Access)

Start Date

4-16-2016 2:45 PM

End Date

4-16-2016 4:00 PM

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
Apr 16th, 2:45 PM Apr 16th, 4:00 PM

The Testing Effect Varies with Spaced Versus Massed Learning of Skeletal Muscle Information

Nessmith-Lane Atrium

Learners who engage in testing or effortful retrieval throughout learning tend to retain more following a delay compared to those who read and reread to-be-learned materials. Additionally, studying sessions that are spaced apart by one or more days tend to promote more recall than do those that are massed together at the same time. Although both the testing and spacing effects are well-established in the cognitive psychology literature, no studies have examined their additive effect with anatomy and physiology information. The purpose of this study was to determine if the benefits of a testing-based strategy vary with massed versus spaced learning sessions. Participants used the following strategies to learn sets of human skeletal muscle information: 1. reading-rereading on three different days (RRRRx3), 2. reading-testing on three different days (RTRTx3), 3. reading-rereading on two different days (RRRRRRx2), 4. reading-testing on two different days (RTRTRTx2) and 5. reading-testing on a single day (RT6x1). The five strategies were standardized so that participants used each for a total of exactly twenty four minutes. The retention of muscle information was assessed via free recall. The results were analyzed using a repeated measures analysis of variance. One week after learning, the assessment scores were 24.10 å± 3.08, 33.74 å± 3.43, 15.47 å± 2.44, 20.56 å± 2.89 and 12.76 å± 2.02 for the RRRRx3, RTRTx3, RRRRRRx2, RTRTRTx2 and RT6x1 strategies, respectively. In conclusion, the more spaced strategies produced significantly better recall than the less spaced strategies, the testing-based strategies produced significantly better recall than reading-only strategies, and the combination of spacing and testing generated the greatest recall of muscle information.