Problem Background
Long-term memory has been extensively observed and examined by researchers to determine whether the mechanism of information retention can be maximized. As memory serves a primary role in a variety of activities and processes, it is important to highlight ways in which it can be improved. One essential aspect that has been under analysis is the ability to recall knowledge after a certain amount of time has passed. Each person comes in contact with large amounts of data daily, yet being able to reconnect with it can be difficult.
The examination has assisted in the formulation of the “testing effect”, which implies that practice tests positively affect memory compared to solely learning. Testing allows for the information to be encoded and, later, retrieved. The current paper aims to investigate the problem of memory recall by experimentally determining whether testing invariable improves memory or whether certain circumstances are required for such results to be achieved.
Literature Review
As highlighted previously, the topic has been researched in abundance due to the possibility of incorporating findings in academic and professional processes, as content retention is critical to excelling in school and work. For example, retrieval practice, which is synonymous with the testing effect, has been studied by Buchin and Mulligan (2022). The authors cite the cognitive load theory as the basis for the research, implying that effort, information presentation, and the creation of a permanent store of memories relate to how much one can retain. Buchin and Mulligan have hypothesized that testing is more efficient than studying, and prior knowledge has a mediating effect. The results highlight that the hypothesis was, indeed, factual, yet prior knowledge does not have an impact on the results. Authors additionally mention that despite the findings, the general consensus in education is that priority is to be granted to restudy, which contrasts with the conclusion of the study illustrating the importance of tests to retain data.
Additional research was conducted to compare and contrast learning and testing effects. Mulligan and Picklesimer (2016) have assessed the two methods, yet the effect of divided attention was incorporated. The hypothesis was that disruptions would create disparities among groups partaking in the two learning techniques. Mulligan and Picklesimer highlight the methodological practices of obtaining feedback during such experiments yet acknowledge their drawbacks and have relied on test variables rather than subjective opinions.
The results have revealed that divided attention does not majorly hinder memory in the case of retrieval practice, yet a similar conclusion cannot be stated in regard to traditional studying. The authors acknowledge that the findings can be influenced by the learning process being viewed as non-prioritizing, which would lead to opposing views. Nonetheless, the speculations do not hinder the findings suggesting memory improvement in the case of testing effects despite possible distracting activities and processes.
The following piece of research also adopts the theory of testing effect being primordial when it comes to data retention. Veltre et al. (2014) conducted an experiment exemplifying the differences between review tests and restudying on memory performance. Methodologically, the article corresponds with the prior studies in terms of its experimental design. Concerning findings, it was determined that restudy is the less favorable method to motivate memory efficiency. The discussion correlates with the authors’ hypothesis that testing effects surpass other measures when it comes to retention. An opposing view that the researchers themselves suggest is that transfer-appropriate processing does not directly correlate with testing effects. Nonetheless, the results align with the findings of the previously mentioned studies.
A different contrasting point was selected in the research comparing test-enhanced learning and self-explanation. Larsen et al. (2013) formulated a hypothesis that self-explanation is not as effective when it comes to information retention, and the findings support the claim. Namely, the results illustrate that students can benefit from both methods, with testing being the more efficient out of the two. Theoretically, the authors agree that despite self-explanation being typically encouraged in education, more focus is to be addressed on evidence-based measures that hinder a lack of memory of learned material. Nonetheless, contrasting views correlating with the preference for self-learning in the academic system are presented.
Purpose
The past work presented in the literature review exemplified knowledge of the efficiency of testing in various settings. Nonetheless, researchers have yet to test the theory when it comes to word pairs. For word pairs, it would imply the effort of constructing algorithms to remember the words as a collective, which implies a more complex associative relationship and more pressure to memorize.
The current study will incorporate testing effects on words paired together to exemplify whether the theory can be applied under these circumstances. The proposed research will answer the question by emphasizing whether testing can improve information retention in the case of non-related pairings, which are difficult to find associations with. Additionally, it will add to the pool of knowledge on memory and learning potential. The issue is to construct a valid, unbiased precedent among students as the selected population via an experimental methodology.
Hypotheses
Two hypotheses can be formulated in relation to the current study. On the one hand, it is hypothesized that the group that engages in self-studying will not perform on the same level as the group that takes preliminary tests as a part of their learning experience. On the other hand, it is speculated that the group engaged in testing will perform better at remembering noun pairs compared to the group that studies without the testing effect method. Previous literature supports that the methodology is more favorable despite potential distractions (Mulligan & Picklesimer, 2016). Hence, the hypothesis is that word pairs will not hinder one’s ability to retain information via evidence-based techniques.
The two experimental groups consist of students who will study traditionally and those who will partake in practice tests to study the word pairs. The information retention will be measured via a test that both groups will take to determine the memory that has remained of the nouns included in the exercise. To determine the outcomes obtained via the experimental design, a t-test will be employed.
The independent variable is the learning condition, namely, the testing or learning depending on the group of students. The dependent variable is the mean number of noun pairs recalled in the final test. Control variables will also be implemented to ensure the difficulty of the noun pairings, the timing limit for the test, and other conditions are similar for both groups. Variables are appropriate to test the aforementioned hypotheses as they will contribute to the formulation of a conclusion regarding the most effective way to enhance memory via learning strategy, which can be either through tests or studying.
References
Buchin, Z. L., & Mulligan, N. W. (2022). Supplemental material for retrieval-based learning and prior knowledge. Journal of Educational Psychology, 115(1), 22-35. Web.
Larsen, D. P., Butler, A. C., & Roediger III, H. L. (2013). Comparative effects of test-enhanced learning and self-explanation on long-term retention. Medical Education, 47(7), 674–682. Web.
Mulligan, N. W., & Picklesimer, M. (2016). Attention and the testing effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42(6), 938–950. Web.
Veltre, M. T., Cho, K. W., & Neely, J. H. (2014). Transfer-appropriate processing in the testing effect. Memory, 23(8), 1229–1237. Web.
Loading...
