Learn 2 Learn PDF

 Most effective form of note taking: Interleaving Definition: Higham: A metacognitive illusion= misalignment between subjective...

 Most effective form of note taking: Interleaving Definition: Higham: A metacognitive illusion= misalignment between subjective Cornwall and Bjork= -40 minute lecture, followed by immediate and delayed tests -Had to look at different types of paintings assessment of how learning works (metacognition) and how it -control group (passive observation) -blocked learning looked all at one artist at a time really works -annotation group (annotating lecture slide handouts) -interleaving learning looked at many artists at once E.g. Students believe that one method of revision is better for -regular note group (take notes on blank paper) -they were then tested and had to classify each painting by its learning than another, even when its not -key points (write 3 key points from each lecture segment) painter Cause of metacognitive illusions: -verbatim (copy everything from slides) -found that interleaving group got more correct than the Fluency Heuristic= -found that those in the verbatim group achieved second highest in blocked learning group if learning is easy, they think they have a good memory and durable the immediate test, while key points group achieved highest -also found that most thought that blocked learning was better learning -in the delayed test, key points, regular notes and verbatim achieved than interleaving, despite their results showing they achieved E.g. ‘I learn more if the lecturers presents the material well so I don’t higher, with key points achieving the highest higher in interleaving need to revise this content’ -long term delay test, verbatim group showed the most forgetting, -those who thought that there was no difference between with regular and key points showing less forgetting blocked and interleaving, mostly achieved higher doing What actually happens: -note taking group had more accuracy, with control group having less interleaving -Desirable difficult learning (Bjork)=more obstacles in learning are accuracy more likely to lead to enduring learning -control group spent more time revising, while the note taking group -struggling and forgetting things are good as you are more likely to spent less time revising Carpenter- appearances can be deceiving retain the information Aim- effect of lecture fluency on students metacognitive s Yunker and Yunker= awareness -deplored lecture rating and final marks Meta cognitive illusions and Experiment 1= Method- watched short videos of someone explaining a -two courses with the same students but different instructors desirable difficulties concept- either watched fluent video (where the instructor held -rated instructors in a intro course -put into an intermediate accounting course and did a test eye contact and spoke without notes) or the disfluent video E-learning: (where the instructor looked away and read their notes) -found that higher ratings in intro accounting were negatively -another place where metacognitive illusions are problematic correlated with grades in intermediate accounting (the better they -they had to predict how much they would remember later -they are designed to be fluent and entertaining for students as most rated, the lower the grades) -ppts also asked how knowledgeable their lecturer was and learning in the modern day, is now done this way how effective they were Reasons for these results= Spaced learning: -popular lecturers many be adopting fluent teaching styles that -did a distractor task -spaced learning is when you have gaps in between studying the the students enjoy but isn’t good for learning =ppts who viewed the fluent speaker predicted that they would same content e.g. revising maths Monday, Wednesday and friday -the students believe that because they enjoyed it and believed remember more than the disfluent speaker- however actual they understood it, they didn’t need to go over the lecture slides performance did not differ between the two groups Emeny= (metacognitive illusion) -given problems to solve -ppts who viewed the fluent speaker felt more confident and -spaced condition solved 4, left it for one week, did said they learned the information better- also rated higher for Deslauriers= interest and their motivation -given handouts with physics problems another 4, left it for week and did the other 4 -massed condition did all 12 in one go Experiment 2= -2 conditions- active and passive group -both groups made 2 predictions of their scores -ppts given as much time as they wanted to restudy the video -passive- instructor presented slides and solved problems, and students -spaced condition predicted less than the mass condition content before completing the questions and memory test completed handout while listening firstly =test performance did not differ significantly between ppts in -active- students in small groups working on problems together and -the mass condition predicted a lot higher than they both conditions instructor walked round to give out help achieved- they felt fluent doing the tasks in one go so -positive correlation emerged between reading time and later -took a test predicted higher but closer to the test, they hadn’t memory accuracy for ppts who viewed the disfluent speaker -found that active learning students achieved higher in the test than the practiced as much but not those who viewed the fluent speaker passive -spaced condition predicted mostly similar to what they -fluent speaker again rated as more knowledgable, prepared -those in the passive group enjoyed it more than the active group, they also achieved, and they achieved higher than the massed and effective felt they had learnt more, that the instructor was effective and they wished all their courses were taught the same way condition Definition: Roediger and Karpicke= Test enhanced learning- Roediger and Karpicke= Taking tests can improve performance for a later test -ppts studied two passages -taking. A memory test not only assesses what someone knows but also enhances later -studied one twice and then other once, retention Kernel and Bjork= then did a free recall test -testing facilitates learning only because tests offer an opportunity to restudy material Asked why students quiz themselves -completed final free recall test for each -if students are tested on material and successfully recall it, they will remember it in the future -68% said they do it to see how much they have passage either 5 mins, 2 days or 1 week -Aim= investigate the testing effect under educationally relevant conditions, using prose materials learned later and free recall tests without feedback -18% said they learn more than through rereading =for short retention intervals, restudying Experiment 1= was better than the test -ppts read one passage for 7 mins, then tested in free recall =for longer retention intervals, the test -then solve maths Karpicke= was better than restudying -then did it again either 5 mins, 2 days or 1 week after -surveyed college students about how they study -after 5 days, the test group recalled as -had to recall first passages -84% said they reread notes much as the restudy group after 2 days =on initial test, recalled 70% -55% saying rereading was their top strategy -after 5 min interval, those who restudied gained higher -11% self tested -after 2 days and 1 week, those who were tested recalled almost double -1% said testing was their top strategy -also found that forgetting occurred as the retention interval grew longer Experiment 2= -studied 4 times with no test, studied 3 times with 1 test, studied s Key theories: once and took 3 tests 1. Transfer appropriate processing= Backwards testing effect -then had a final test 5 mins or 1 week later -given questionnaire on how interesting it was, how well they thought final test performance should be better when cognitive processes required at encoding and retrieval are the same they would remember it 2. Retrieval effort hypothesis= -had 5 min or 1 week retention interval Retrieval is more difficult than passive study, serving as a desirable difficult =subjects who studied, rated the passage as less interesting due to -the greater the retrieval effort, the greater the benefit of testing Tests and mental health = Smith boredom of repeated readings 3. Mediator effectiveness hypothesis= -ppts studied list of words and images -subjects who studied only were more confident they would People activate related information during initial test -either studied or did free retrieval practice remember it for longer -semantic elaboration during initial test boosts subsequent memory -24 hours, stress task or non stressful task -on initial recall test, those who only studied recalled more than both -retrieval practice enhanced recall conditions -stress impaired recall when only studying, but in -in the later recall tests, those who did 2 or more tests remembered Testing in the real world= retrieval practice, no difference between stressed most and non stressed ppts -greater forgetting in the only studying condition McDaniel= -students took weekly quizzes or were given information to read only -quizzes were multiple choice or short answer questions -quizzing but not restudying enhanced final test performance -short answer quizzes were more beneficial than multiple choice questions Kroman= -medical students completed a course -intervention group completed 35 hours of teaching and 30 mins of testing -control group completed 35 hours of teaching and 30 mins active scenarios Agarwal= -2 weeks later test and final test performance was better in intervention group -meta analysis of 50 experiments examining effects of retrieval practice Me -94% of studies revealed positive effects of retrieval practice -majority of effect sizes were medium or larger Theories of forward testing effect: Definition: 1. Encoding vs retrieval mechanisms Forward testing effect is the effect that taking a test on studied material improves learning of -encoding= initial learning phase new information Unlike the backwards testing effect: -storage= we can look at how long the information os stored for by manipulating the -all ppts are given a new set of words to learn after the first ones, and have to recall the retention interval last list -retrieval= the final test Spunzer, Khan and Schachter= -theory suggests that forward testing effect occurs as there is improved attention in -did an online lecture segment, maths questions and then a test after each segment encoding, or their strategy changes -had to remember the last segment mostly as critical test =students reported having experienced significantly fewer bouts of mind wandering 2. Release from proactive interference: -students in tested group took more notes -texts provide a change in context that restudying does not -students in tested group correctly answered more questions about the last segment -context change allows ppts to segregate the lists and discriminate between them -new information is stronger than the old information =frequent testing during lectures raises concerns over -without testing the lists blur into one and can’t distinguish between them anxiety =students in tested group reported lower levels of Spzunar= -with interim testing, everything is separable -the ppts had to learn lists of words anxiety towards last test and also viewed learning as -either were tested after each list, did maths 3. Strategy change theory: less mental taxing questions after each list, or restudied after each list -experience of testing teaches ppts how to study so they use more -they did maths as a distractor task after studying s effective strategies -did a test of the last list they learnt and a cumulative -if they know they are being tested regularly, they will study more and have test of them all more attention (more attentive at encoding) Forward testing effect =taking the last test after being tested from list 1-4 improved learning and recall of the last list -test taking led to ever intrusions from the previous lists as the other conditions Spzunzer= Yang= -watched online lecture, did a test or restudied -ppts studied face name or Swahili-English pairs in lists 1-3 -then watched final part and did a test and they were asked if they mind wandered or not -all pts studied face name pairs in list 4 -more mind wandering found in the non-tested maths group -interim testing improved final list 4 recall even when list 1-3 and list 4 material -interim testing group did report mind wandering that was related to the lecture than the restudy group were different -the forward testing effect is transferable to different stimuli Jing= -students watched online lecture with interim testing or restudying Yang= -ppts asked what you are thinking about during the lecture -even when different formats of information (study-picture, study-test and study- -mind wandering rates did not differ between the two groups face), forward testing effect again replicated -interim testing group did report mind wandering that was related to the lecture than the restudy group Traditional views on errors in learning: Surprise and attention: -traditional learning theorists thought that errors were bad Butterfield and Metcalfe= -if someone wants to avoid errors on a test, they should avoid errors in the learning process as well -ppts completed a hypercorrection task -wrong answers will become stronger and therefore more likely to be repeated -ppts also asked to detect soft tones -led to influential errorless learning (guidance that ensures no errors are made, positive reinforcement for correct answers) -ppts missed more tones that were presented with feedback following him confidence errors than low confidence errors =suggests ppts attention was captured by the feedback Proactive interference: -when old memories interfere with the acquisition and retrieval of new memories -the new is forgotten Pre-testing effect: -the errors might interfere with memory of correct answer Kornell= -ppts studied weakly related word pairs and had no exposure to the answers -ppts guessed mostly wrong Generation effect: -any correct guesses removed from data set =a phenomenon in which people typically remember information that they have generated themselves better than information that has =testing improved learning even when all answers were wrong been generated for them -errors fostered learning s E.g. active learning is better (generating answers yourself rather than rereading notes) Learning from errors Confidence in errors- the hypercorrection effect Butterfield and Metcalfe= -ppts answered questions and rated confidence for each Kane and Anderson= -feedback provided after each answer -generation produced better subsequent recall of the correct answers -5 min retention interval than reading -cued recall final test -similar pattern for the undetermined sentences, where generations were -high confidence errors more likely to be correlated than low confidence almost always wrong at encoding errors -incorrect generation didn’t harm learning Search set theory: Kornell, Hays, Bjork= -producing a guess causes activation of related concepts -read only condition, the question and answer presented -partial activation of the correct answer allows it to be encoded more effectively when it is revealed together -in the test condition, the question was presented alone for a few seconds and then ppts asked to produce an answer Grimaldi and Karpicke= before real answer was revealed -same experiment as Kornell (studied Seabrooke= =during the study phase, ppts answered none correct -increased motivation to learn due -learning showed to progress well after errors word pairs and then guessed them until to errors -unsuccessful retrieval attempts followed by feedback was correct -ppts gave higher motivation more effective than spending same time studying the -pretesting improved recall of related ratings to learn facts that they had answer to be recalled later words guessed than not guessed -shots in the dark guesses don’t improve recall Definitions Education: Rohrer and Taylor Spacing= temporal aspects of repeated information Bahrick -student required to find the number Interleaving= sequencing- the order that material from different categories is presented -ppts studied pairs until they mastered them of permutations of a sequence of Ebbinghaus= -relearned the pairs again over 5 more sessions items with at least one repeated item -memorised nonsense syllables to the ticking of a metronome and recalled them -took a final test. 30 days later -either practiced all problems at once later -those who had the test after after 30 days got more right then those (massed) or split over two sessions -massed learning- day 1- 68 massed repetitions of a 12 syllable list, day 2- 7 additional who had test sooner (spaced) repetitions needed for perfect recital =Spacing slows learning but forgetting is much less -final test was 1 or 4 weeks later -spaced learning- day 1- 38 spaced repetitions of a list, day 2- 7 additional repetitions =those in the 4 week spaced gap needed for one perfect recital Bird= recalled more then the massed 4 -longer spacing gaps improved English learning adults understanding of week condition (long term) while Greeno= grammatical rules those in the massed condition recalled -ppts studied word digit pairs -two practice sessions separated by 3 or 14 days more in the short term -shown word and asked to remember the digit that went with it -tested 60 days later -feedback given =by day 60, those who did spacing with practice sessions over 14 days -3 presentations of each pair, either spaced or massed recalled more on the test -during learning, massed condition recalled more correct than spacing but long Why has spacing effect been ignored in education: term, the spaced condition recalled more correctly Problem 1= metacognition is at odds with reality s Why is spacing effective: Baddeley and Longman= -postman trained over several sessions to type alpha numeric code Encoding variability= Spacing and Interleaving material using typewriter -spaced repetitions associated with the to-be-remembered information with -one hour session per day over 12 weeks or 2x 2 hour sessions per several contexts, facilitating retrieval day over 3 weeks (spacing) (In massed, it would be associated with one context therefore less likely to =opposute results obtained when asked ‘how did they find the training’ recreate this context- whereas in spaced, learning in many contexts means and ‘if they could do it again which schedule would you choose’ Emeny, Hartwig and Rohrer that you are more likely to be able to recreate at least one context) -examine how maths spacing affects =rated more satisfactory when massing and would choose massing students judgement of their future over spacing Deficient processing account= performance =what they think is working better is not -processing of second and subsequent repetitions is deficient in the massed -massed into a single session or condition due to inability to maintain attention Problem 2= education system is such that students are seldom divided evenly across 3 practice disabused of this metacognitive illusion (Lack of attention when learning something for one long period of time- sessions 1 week apart in spaced, you get time to reset between and have more concentration) -massed learning is effective in short term -students predicted their test scores -exams are administered immediately after a cramming session and twice, immediately after and there are seldom later exams on material Retrieval account= immediately before the test -spaced repetitions prompt retrieval of previous encounters with the to-be- -students never see how much has been forgotten as they don’t need =spaced practice led to accurate to remembered information during study, which facilitates later retention predictions of test scores whereas (Retrieval practice is occurring during the spacing condition, you’re engaging Rohrer and Taylor= massed practice engendered -students practiced computing volume of shaped objects with it more- whereas in massed, information is all staying in short term memory overconfidence -blocking (massing) leads to good short term performance, but poor long as seeing it once) =spaced improved test scores term from 1 week later Limitations to spaced learning: Problem 3= pressure to present material in modularised form to facilitate -will longer spacing intervals create better Cepeda= organisation and immediate comprehension long term learning Tested 26 combinations of spacing and retention intervals in an online study -organisation (fluent learning) vs desirable difficulty (disfluent learning) -optimal spacing interval depends on the =if you have a short retention interval then you want a short spacing interval -topics and problems are massed in textbook chapters retention interval -lectures are organisation by topic Definition: Rawson, Walsh, Vaughn, Dunlosky Successive relearning= retreival practice to some level of mastery over multiple spaced sessions -Lithuanian- English word pairs Mastery= must answer question correctly, if not, corrective feedback is provided and question -one initial study trial per item answered again in the same session -had to get it right once or dropped out (had to relearn) Criterion level= number of times given question needs to be answered correctly to achieve -corrective feedback given after errors mastery -four relearning session each separated by a week Trials-to-criterion= the number of attempts to answer a question to criterion level =the more relearning sessions there are, the more they recalled Dropout method= once question has been answered to criterion level, it is dropped from =still remembered most after 3 weeks without relearning further study within the learning session -confounding variables= exposure, relearning time is variable between ppts, relearning time is variable as criterion levels vary, relearning time is variable as within session lag between repetitions is varied Higham= Ebbinghaus= Rawson= -if you restudy in more ‘Have not with their ‘Relearning potency Rawson and Dunlosky= sessions, recall with improve concerns the advantage -successive relearning involves practicing a task until it is performed disappearance absolutely but retrieval practice group of relearning over single- correctly and then practicing it again until it is performed correctly during ceased to exist’ improved even more session learning’ other spaced practice sessions -just a single successive relearning session substantially boosted retention Roediger, Putnam and Smith= -simply recalling items more times is better for retention regardless of 10 benefits of testing: when those correct recalls happen- however, one week retention was s -retrieval aids later retention of tested material better when students had recalled items correctly one time in each of -testing identifies gaps In knowledge three spaced sessions than when they had correctly recalled each item -testing causes students to learn more from next learning period Successive relearning three times during a single session -testing produces better mental organisation of knowledge -so engaging in more successful retrieval practice during the initial study -testing can improve transfer of knowledge to new contexts session did not ensure better retention in the long term -testing can facilitate retrieval of information that is not tested -testing improved metacognitive monitoring Higham= -testing prevents interference from prior material when learning new material -successive relearning intervention in introductory psychology -testing provides feedback -following each lecture, students did cued questions or had to restudy statements -frequent testing encourage student to study -3 practice sessions per week -criterion level=1 Savings score: -spaced gap of two days -with each successive relearning event, it takes less time/ recital attempts -included metacognitive measure-asked how well they would be able to answer exam questions to achieve mastery -included questionnaires on attention, mastery and anxiety -suggests that forgotten memories are not gone, but made temporarily -2 cued recall tests at end of semester inaccessible -would alternate each week, restudying and relearning (ensures no student is disadvantaged) -question types- cued recall, had gaps in the statements for them to fill in =the students believe they will remember more when they restudy =by the end of the successive relearning, they start to master the material and their metacognition comes inline with what’s going on- they believe they will remember more with relearning =mastering the content through relearning reduces anxiety =at first they believe they can’t do it and gain more anxiety but as the content becomes mastered, they have less anxiety =there was less mastery at first as their content is being learned but after each session, they master more of the content =upon first learning, restudying gained more attention, but on the next sessions, they paid more attention when relearning Encoding variability= Jacoby Applied to education= -encoding repeated information in more than one way, often in -also demonstrated that memory is dependent not just on how the information is Smith= more than one context encoded (deep vs shallow), but on whether testing draws on encoding processes -investigated peoples memory for word lists that -context can be an external environment, method of processing, -generation effect= self generating information leads to better memory than reading it were either studied twice in same context or in mood, drug influence Encoding: different -used to explain the spacing effect -read= …-cold -also a neutral context -generate an antonym (opposite of word shown) -P context- classroom with no windows, Context reinstatement= Test: researcher in coat and tie -matching the encoding and retrieval context -standard recognition -M context- tiny apartment in labs with window -facilitates memory -expected a generation effect and two way mirror, researcher wore flannel shirt -encoding specificity (most effective retrieval cues are the ones Perceptual identification task: and jeans encoded specifically with the tbr informaiton) -prior research- if a word has been studied recently, better able to identify it -neutral- classroom with windows -environment contains cues -may benefit more from perceptual (reading) processes than conceptual (generation) =good memory is when they mixed up contexts- processes studied in M and then second in P Transfer appropriate processing= =generating vs reading words leads to better standard recognition =second highest is when studied in P and then M -relationship between type of processing at encoding and test =generating vs reading words leads to worse perceptual identification =when studied in same place, memory was worse -if it is appropriate, good transfer between learning and test s Imundo Tulving and Thomson= -wanted to replicate Smiths results with longer retention interval -encoding= target words encoded with weakly related cue words Context reinstatement and -investigated the effect of testing vs restudying -recognition test= ppts were trying to recognise targets generated in the encoding variability -Ppts first studied a word list in a context context of strongly related cue words -restudied same list in same context -these were not there cue words that were encoded specifically with the -restudied same list in different context target words Recommendations: -tested on list in same context -context mismatch= poor memory -vary context where you are learning -tested on list in different context -recall test= weakly related cue words presented again that were encoded -mentally reinstate before an exam -hypothesised that tested performance was poor in the varied context specifically with target word condition because they retrieved so little during training -context reinstatement= good memory Morris, Bransford and Franks -failing to retrieve during retrieval practice does little to help performance -ppts encoded nouns with an orienting task that either: (unless feedback is given which it wasn’t) -encouraged deep (semantic) processing -because the context changed between intial study and training, retreival E.g. asked ‘the — had a silver engine’ shown train or eagle was poor -or encouraged shallow (phonemic) processing =same context= 36% recall E.g. asked ‘— rhymes with legal’ shown train or eagle =varied context= 17% recall -standard recognition test= did you study this word earlier Exams: -encoding variability not critical as only need to maximise retrieval Train or Eagle -not always possible to write exams in same environment as learning but can still mental -rhyme recognition test= did you study a word earlier that reinstate the context rhymed with this word =deep semantic encoding leads to better standard Fisher and Geiselman= recognition while deep semantic encoding leads to worse -cognitive interview techniques Levels of processing: rhyme recognition -mental reinstatement, recall events in reverse order, report all, describe in another POV -a way of thinking about memory in terms of how -deep level of processing is not necessarily superior to =mentally revisit event of learning revisit mental state deeply processed information is during encoding shallow encoding Weir and May= -semantic (meaning)= deep: durable memories -shallow encoding can lead to good memory too -constancy in environment leads to efficiency in recall -phonemic (sound)= medium: less durable memories -it depends on the type of test -context dependent memory is influenced by emotional and drug induced -orthography (letters)= shallow: fragile memories that -if the test is sensitive to the type of processing that states decay quickly occurred during encoding, then memory will be good -group tested in the regular classroom performed better Multiple choice testing as an assessment -used in schools and universities as easy to grade and objective Problem for formula scoring: Butler and Roediger= -examinees don’t like being penalised -negative testing effect reduced by corrective feedback -two markers will often disagree on grades so this avoids that -test scores influenced by meta cognition given -used in SATs -removes ceiling or floor questions (if they all get the same question -test score influenced by risk-taking tendencies always right or wrong) -students tend to omit answers that are correct, reducing Multiple choice testing as a learning tool their score Multiple choice test formats -most common is to select a signal option representing the correct answers McDaniel= =however this doesn’t measure partial knowledge very well Higham= -uni course on brain and behaviour Partial knowledge= examinee knows only part of the answer or is not -given multiple choice questions -assigned weekly readings confident about their answer -when ppts omitted things, they scored less -practiced with multiple choice quizzing, short answer -given change to answer ones they omitted, and they quizzing or rereading Other formats do measure partial knowledge: gained higher marks -corrective feedback given = short answer (cued recall) -confidence marking (assign confidence to favourite option) is best -elimination testing (eliminate all options that examinee identifies as incorrect) s -complete ordering (rank options from most to least favourite) Little= -partial ordering (eliminate if confident and rank the remaining ones) -ppts first completed online Multiple choice practice tests with -probability testing (distribute 100 points across the options) Multiple choice testing general knowledge questions -elimination testing to encourage processing of all the lures -after a distractor task, completed a cued recall test -previously tested items (repeated) Probability testing: -related questions -final score is sum of probabilities assigned to correct answers Partial knowledge: -new questions (control) -precision is measurement of partial knowledge -examinees tend to like it (allows them to express knowledge in a -even if the students first options if incorrect, but second is correct, they would still get more than -for the repeated questions, they got them mostly correct natural way) -for the related questions, they realised the different type of 0% for that question for probability testing -but in standard format, it would be 0% answers from the first learning question and got them mostly right -got the new questions mostly wrong Multiple correct answers: -select one or more options and there may be more than one correct answer -must decide how many correct answers there are and which ones they are -concern that risk taking students will score differently than risk-averse Alamri and Higham students when that has nothing to do with what we are measuring -similar design as Little but tested 2 groups of ppts -group 1 - practice tests- multiple choice, then final test- cued recall Correction for guessing: -group 2 - practice tests- multiple choice, then final test- multiple choice -limited knowledge of options means that correct answers can occur without multiple choice was most successful when shown repeated questions and new questions underlying knowledge (correct guessing) =when related information, the accuracy was less successful than cued recall -way to fix this is using a scoring rule =most of what errors were due to ppts selecting the corrective feedback from there practice -many different scoring rules have been developed to counter the effect of correct tests which is no longer correct guessing =ppts believed the related questions were repeated (and had the same answer)= false recognition -most common for standard testing- subtract partial score for each incorrect response -1/(n-1) where n=number of options -can omit answers to avoid the penalty Marsh= Kelley= -peerwise involves two effective learning techniques Generation of the questions was successful in helping with exam -ppts answering SAT 2 Mlultiple choice test questions -generation- generating information leads to better results -formula scored, so there was option to omit response memory than reading =the retrieval practice also helped in improving exam results -filler tasks in between -answered short answer questions (40 from earlier test, and 40 new) -retrieval practice- retrieving information leads to better =for undergraduates-for the correct answers, there’s a big benefit of long term retention than studying it being tested on them -ppts required to generate and answer questions -for each textbook chapter, they generated one Sparck and Bjork- On the learning benefits of =for undergraduates- more likely to choose multiple choice lures if question confidence weighted testing they had been tested on it before =high school juniors- got more multiple choice lures than correct -could choose content -required to provide explanations for the correct and -multiple choice practice test with competitive incorrect alternatives can answers if they had been tested incorrect options enhance performance on related but different questions appearing on a On the initial test, undergraduates mainly got them right but omitted -evenly spaced throughout the semester later cued recall test quite a few -had to evaluate other students questions -correct alternatives is correct but also why the other alternatives are =high school juniors didn’t omit much, but got loads of lures -compared exam performance on these question to incorrect -if multiple choice initial test is hard, it provides negative effects control questions -well constructed multiple choice practice tests can improve the recall (omitting and multiple choice lures) which negatively influence the final of such related information on a final examination by encouraging test s test takers to activate information in memory about incorrect alternatives in order to reject them Negatives of the multiple choice practice tests: Multiple choice testing -the retrieval process itself changes recalled information, making it more -being exposed to lots of answers and misinformation in the easily accessible in the future practice test can make you remember the misinformation and -actively retrieving information on a test results in long term retention of then you put that on the final test that material than does restudying that information =negative testing effect Related questions effect: -multiple choice tests, though perhaps the most ubiquitous type of test, -related questions with different correct Negative testing effect: are often criticised as being less effective -repeated questions with the same -multiple choice tests are thought to rely more on recognition answers Meta analysis: correct answer processes -feedback on test 1 is erroneously selected -lures on test 1 are falsely recalled on Rowland= cued recall is best again on test 2 -well constructed multiple choice tests can trigger productive retrieval test 2 processes Adesope= Multiple choice is best -caused by feedback -reduced by feedback -errors caused by responding with earlier -three alternatives are placed at the corners of a triangle Yang= multiple choice is best -errors caused by repeating earlier corrective feedback -guessing is greatly discouraged errors -compared performance on a final cued recall test of studied passages that were followed by an initial confidence weighted multiple choice Alamri and Higham= tests or a standard multiple choice test or an initial test -does false recognition of practice questions lead to impaired multiple choice performance in educational contexts -ppts read a passage for 9 minutes and then answered questions or -first year psych students wrote 55 item multiple choice rest in played a game prep for a final exam -all ppts were asked open ended survey questions -main manipulation was the sequencing of related pairs -for both conditions, first passage score did not differ from second -included related separated, related back to back pairs and -ppts in confidence weighted multiple choice tests felt that it assessed new items their knowledge better =final test accuracy higher for questions back to back =ppts did not change their test taking strategies from first to second =second highest for separated information =multiple choice tests can be effective in activating information that is =lowest for new information not directly tested =multiple choice questions in a confidence weighted format can increase such benefits Sparrow= landers and landers= Extrinsic rewards- a reward not related to learning e.g. money -ppts presented with easy trivia questions in one block, and hard trivia questions -ppts completed online wiki-based project Murayama and Kuhbandner in another block -random assignment to gamified or control -ppts answered trivia questions before being shown answers -after each block, ppts completed a modified stroop task group -half of ppts told they would receive money for every correct guess -words shown either related to computers or not, had to respond to the colour -gamified group were part of a leaderboard -memory for half of the answers tested immediately and the rest 1 of the word (unrelated to course grades) week later =if they were thinking of computers, they were slower as they would be -game characteristic= leaderboard -money improved memory only on the delayed test preoccupied and wouldn’t focus on the colour of the word -learner behaviour= time on task -delayed test- money only improved memory for uninteresting =for words like google and yahoo (computer related), the ppts had a higher -learning outcome= project performance questions reaction time than with words like Nike and Target =time students spent significantly predicated academic performance Murayama= The undermining effect Experiment 3 =gamification significantly moderated the -japenese ppts completed a stop watch (experimental group) and -ppts presented with trivia statements and asked them to type the statements relationship between time on task and watch stop (control) task into a dialogue box and press enter academic performance- leaderboard group -Stop watch was interesting even without extrinsic incentives -for 1/3 of trials, told it saved, for 1/3 said it saved in a folder and for 1/3 told it made 30 more edits than the control group -ppts randomly allocated to reward or control group was erased -reward group earned money for each point earned -either got asked if the statement was exactly what you read or if the -control group, no reward s statement saved or erased -ppts completed 2 sessions, second session not given a reward =mostly got the erased statements correct than the other two groups Technology, Gamification -at the end of each session, ppts given 2 min to engage in either =mainly got the saved folder statements correct when asked if the statement task or do something else was saved or erased and rewards =extrinisc monetary reward reduced the number of times ppts voluntarily played the stop watch task =undermining effect persisted even when rewards were no longer Giebl- thinking before googling contingent on performance -ppts presented with easy or hard trivia questions -guessing improved final recall relative to being presented with answer (pre-testing effect) -had to think about answer and then google it, or google it straight away Gruber= intrinsic curiosity -trivia questions and had to rate their curiosity =googling right away produced a better cued recall than immediate presentation -presented each question one at a time =thinking before googling produced the best recall -presented random face -wanted to see if they would remember the face after a high curiosity or a low curiosity’s question Gamification= application of game features/ mechanics in a non-game context =when people were highly curious about the question, they were more likely to get it right =when people saw photo after a high curiosity question, they remembered the face in the photo better Landers= theory of gamified learning Money enhances memory consolidation but only for boring material- -attempts to explain the casual mechanisms by which gamified tasks enhance learning Murayama and Kuhbandner (SHOWN IN STUDY ABOVE) -proposes 2 processes by which gamification affects learning -results showed that monetary rewards promote memory performance only after a delay 1. A mediating process (more direct) -moneys ability to improve memory has got attention due to new neurological findings indicating that the 2. A moderating process (less direct) hippocampal memory system and the Mesolimbic reward system form a loop Game characteristics have mediating process on behaviour attitude -monetary rewards promote memory consolidation by activating the mesolimbic reward system, which Instructional content has a mediating process on learning outcome increased dopamine release in the hippocampal memory system Game characteristics has a moderating process on learning outcomes -gave trivia questions, half then did a immediate memory test and half did a delayed memory test -answere question and the answer showed up after -half ppts given money for each correct answer If the course is low quality, then gamifying wont help -effect of monetary rewards was larger in the delayed memory test -ppts recalled more answers in the money condition, and had better recall for interesting items  Learning styles: Highlighting/ underlining: rereading: -students often like to make beautiful notes as it feels productive and seems -re-reading is one of the most frequently reported Learning styles- the notion that different people have more memorable different modes of instruction that are most effective for strategies that students use -this is a source of procrastination -rereading will have some benefits, relative to doing them -many students report this as preferred study strategy nothing Types: -relative to other strategies such as self testing and Dunlosky- low utility elaborative interrogation, re-reading has low utility -auditory Peterson= students read a textbook chapter and some underlined with -visual reading others didn’t Karpicke= 84% of students said this was -reading/writing top strategy -kinaesthetic -then did MCQ 2 months later -similar performance on questions that tapped specific Keyword mnemonic: knowledge but underlining group performed worse than the -using keywords and imagery to link concepts together -Preferences doesn’t mean better learning= may prefer one -imagery can improve memory as it helps to elaborate and encode style but it may not be the best way for them to learn control group on questions that required inferences information deeper but many concepts may not be so easy to keyword or imagine Testing the learning styles hypothesis: -practically, students and teachers spend time creating this, poor use -need to demonstrate that learning is enhanced when teaching of time s matches preferred learning styles -evidence that imagery produces enhanced learning over long term E.g. have visual learners learn visually or auditory, then take a is weak test Revision strategies Moderate utility strategies: Pashler= -reviews of controlled studies revealed no compelling evidence for learning Elaborative interrogation: styles -involves producing an explanation for why a factor or concept is true or false -people do not recall more when information is presented in a way that -benefits seen in a wide range of contexts and age groups aligns with their learning styles -benefits depend on prior knowledge- larger benefits for high knowledge domain areas Pressley= read sentences, had to explain each sentence in one group, in the other group, had to read out loud the Low utility strategies: Moderate utility: High utility: explanations provided to them -summarisation -elaboration interrogation -practice testing -did a final cued recall test -highlighting -interleaved practice -distributed practice -elaborative interrogation group outperformed the other two groups -rereading -keyword mnemonic Interleaved practice: Dunlosky= implementing a schedule of practice that mixes different kinds of problems or a schedule of study that mixes different kinds of material within a single study session Summarisation: -usually related to the spacing effect, interleaving naturally spaces study of the same concept -writing summaries of to be learnt information -can lead to dramatic improvements in learning -some null effects in the literature, may reflect students not having basic proficiency in the task they are completing Dunlosky -effectiveness depends on whether students -research in this area is small have access to their notes when summarising (if they do, then they might just copy, and if they dont, it is retrieval High utility strategies: practice as long as they dont miss important information) -either studied again or tested some research of evidence of effectiveness Practice testing: -final performance was much better for those who were tested than -ppts studied essay and tested -practising recalling information from memory those who continued studying -summarisation and note taking groups performed best, followed Karpicke and Roediger= -the more tests, the better memory by verbatim and control groups -studied pairs of words -spacing the tests produces the most benefits of repeated testing