Skip to main content
Log in

Combining Retrieval Practice with Elaborative Encoding: Complementary or Redundant?

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Educational Psychology Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The benefits of retrieval practice (practice testing) are pervasive across various materials, learning conditions, and criterial tasks, and consequently researchers and educators have enthusiastically recommended retrieval practice for educational applications. Less research has been devoted to examining the effect of combining retrieval practice with other evidence-based learning strategies; this article focuses on an emerging literature that examines the outcomes of combining potent elaborative encoding methods with retrieval practice. Theoretically, several possibilities can be identified. Augmenting retrieval practice with effective encoding strategies could significantly improve learning relative to retrieval practice alone through complementary mechanisms of each or through effective encoding catalyzing retrieval practice effects. Alternatively, effective encoding combined with retrieval practice might not improve learning (relative to retrieval practice alone), because the processing produced by elaborative encoding strategies is overly redundant with those promoted by retrieval practice. The extant literature, which has focused on everyday learning tasks (e.g., name learning) and educationally relevant tasks ranging from learning of arbitrary associations (e.g., new vocabulary meanings) to learning from connected discourse, is reviewed, and helps inform these possibilities. The findings largely converge on the conclusion that incorporating elaborative encoding techniques with retrieval practice prior to, but not concurrent with, retrieval practice provides a boost for learning and retention.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. I thank John Dunlosky for raising this possibility.

  2. Using accepted guidelines for preparing texts with high cohesion, the text (on academic self-concept and achievement) was written “such that (a) within each of the four subtopics only one main line of argumentation was followed at a time (i.e., there was no jumping back and forth between different lines of argumentation), and that (b) interrelations between the four subtopics were explicated at the end and/or at the beginning of the respective paragraphs” (Roelle & Nückles, 2019, p. 1345). To ensure high elaboration, main ideas were enriched by illustrative examples.

  3. The paradigm also blended direct benefits of successful retrieval with indirect benefits of potentiating further learning on subsequent study (the first retrieval session was followed by a second reading of the text) (Arnold & McDermott, 2013; Little & McDaniel, 2015). Accordingly, it is possible that the processing learners engaged in while restudying after a retrieval attempt (the processing associated with test-potentiated learning) is the processing that was primarily redundant with organizational or relational processing presumed to be promoted by concept mapping

References

  • Adesope, O. O., Trevisan, D. A., & Sundararajan, N. (2017). Rethinking the use of tests: A meta-analysis of practice testing. Review of Educational Research, 87(3), 659–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agarwal, P. K., Karpicke, J. D., Kang, S. H. K., Roediger, H. L., & McDermott, K. B. (2008). Examining the testing effect with open- and closed-book tests. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 861–876.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agarwal, P. K., Nunes, L. D., & Blunt, J. R. (2021). Retrieval practice consistently benefits student learning: A systematic review of applied research in schools and classrooms. Educational Psychology Review, 33(4), 1409–1453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnold, K. M., & McDermott, K. B. (2013). Test-potentiated learning: Distinguishing between direct and indirect effects of tests. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 940–945.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellezza, F. S. (1987). Mnemonic devices and memory schemas. In M. A. McDaniel & M. Pressley (Eds.), Imagery and related mnemonic processes (pp. 34–55). Springer-Verlag.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bjork, R. A. (1975). Retrieval as a memory modifier: An interpretation of negative recency and related phenomena. In R. L. Solso (Ed.), Information processing and cognition. The Loyola symposium (pp. 123–144). Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blunt, J. R., & Karpicke, J. D. (2014). Learning with retrieval-based concept mapping. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106, 849–858.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bui, D., & McDaniel, M. A. (2015). Enhancing learning during lecture note taking using outlines and illustrative diagrams. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 4, 129–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, A. C., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). Feedback enhances the positive effects and reduces the negative effects of multiple-choice testing. Memory & Cognition, 36, 604–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, S. K. (2009). Cue strength as a moderator of the testing effect: The benefits of elaborative retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 1563–1569.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, S. K. (2011). Semantic information activated during retrieval contributes to later retention: Support for the mediator effectiveness hypothesis of the testing effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 1547–1552.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, S. K., Pashler, H., Wixted, J. T., & Vul, E. (2008). The effects of tests on learning and forgetting. Memory & Cognition, 36(2), 438–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrier, M., & Pashler, H. (1992). The influence of retrieval on retention. Memory & Cognition, 20(6), 633–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, J. M., & Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory and education. Educational Psychology Review, 3(3), 149–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, G., & Burke, D. M. (Eds.). (1993). Memory for proper names. Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, E. L., Reeb, A., & McDaniel, M. A. (2023). Do not forget the keyword method: Learning educational content with arbitrary associations. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 12, 70–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Einstein, G. O., McDaniel, M. A., Owen, P. D., & Cote, N. C. (1990). Encoding and recall of texts: The importance of material appropriate processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 566–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Endres, T., Carpenter, S., Martin, A., & Renkl, A. (2017). Enhancing learning by retrieval: Enriching free recall with elaborative prompting. Learning and Instruction, 49, 13–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fritz, C. O., Morris, P. E., Acton, M., Voelkel, A. R., & Etkind, R. (2007). Comparing and combining retrieval practice and the keyword mnemonic for foreign vocabulary learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21(4), 499–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gates, A. I. (1917). Recitation as a factor in memorizing. Archives of Psychology, 6(40).

  • Glover, J. A. (1989). The ‘“testing”’ phenomenon: Not gone but nearly forgotten. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 392–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, M. W., Pan, S. C., & Rickard, T. C. (2022). Prior episodic learning and the efficacy of retrieval practice. Memory & Cognition, 50(4), 722–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higbee, K. L. (2001). Your memory: How it works and how to improve it (2nd ed.). Marlow.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, B. F., & Hall, J. W. (1982). School applications of the mnemonic keyword method as a study strategy by eight graders. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(2), 230–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jönsson, F. U., Kubik, V., Sundqvist, M. L., Todorov, I., & Jonsson, B. (2014). How crucial is the response format for the testing effect? Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 78(5), 623–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kang, S. H. (2010). Enhancing visuospatial learning: The benefit of retrieval practice. Memory & Cognition, 38, 1009–1017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kang, S. H. K., McDermott, K. B., Roediger, H. L., & III. (2007). Test format and corrective feedback modify the effect of testing on long-term retention. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19(4–5), 528–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kang, S. H., & Pashler, H. (2014). Is the benefit of retrieval practice modulated by motivation? Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 3(3), 183–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karpicke, J. D. (2009). Metacognitive control and strategy selection: Deciding to practice retrieval during learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138(4), 469–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karpicke, J. D. (2017). Retrieval-based learning: A decade of progress. In J. H. Byrne (Ed.), Learning and memory: A comprehensive reference (2nd ed., pp. 487–514). Academic Press.

  • Karpicke, J. D., Lehman, & Aue, W. R. (2014). Retrieval-based learning: An episodic context account. In B. H. Ross (Ed.), Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 61, pp. 237–284). Elsevier.

  • Karpicke, J. D., & Smith, M. A. (2012). Separate mnemonic effects of retrieval practice and elaborative encoding. Journal of Memory and Language, 67(1), 17–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keresztes, A., Kaiser, D., Kovács, G., & Racsmány, M. (2014). Testing promotes long-term learning via stabilizing activation patterns in a large network of brain areas. Cerebral Cortex, 24(11), 3025–3035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y.-E., Yu, S. L., Koenka, A. C., Lee, H., & Heckler, A. F. (2022). Can self-efficacy and task values buffer perceived costs? Exploring introductory- and upper-level physics courses. The Journal of Experimental Education, 90(4), 839–861.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kornell, N., Bjork, R. A., & Garcia, M. A. (2011). Why tests appear to prevent forgetting: A distribution-based bifurcation model. Journal of Memory and Language, 65(2), 85–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, D. P., Butler, A. C., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2013). Comparative effects of test-enhanced learning and self-explanation on long-term retention. Medical Education, 47, 674–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latimier, A., Peyre, H., & Ramus, F. (2021). A meta-analytic review of the benefit of spacing out retrieval practice episodes on retention. Educational Psychology Review, 33, 959–987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, M. E., & Levin, J. R. (1990). Scientific mnemonomies: Methods for maximizing more than memory. American Educational Research Journal, 27(2), 301–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Little, J., & McDaniel, M. A. (2015). Metamemory monitoring and control following retrieval for text. Memory & Cognition, 43, 85–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, N. D., Nguyen, K., & McDaniel, M. A. (2016). Structure building differences influence learning from educational text: Effects on encoding, retention, and metacognitive control. Contemporary Educational Psychology., 46, 52–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maurer, T. W., & Shipp, C. (2021). Challenges of shaping student study strategies for success. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 9(1), 241–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, M. A., & Butler, A. C. (2011). A contextual framework for understanding when difficulties are desirable. In A. Benjamin (Ed.), Successful Remembering and Successful Forgetting: A Festschrift in Honor of Robert A. Bjork (pp. 175–199). Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, M. A., & Donnelly, C. M. (1996). Learning with analogy and elaborative interrogation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 508–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, M. A., Howard, D. C., & Einstein, G. O. (2009). The read-recite-review study strategy: Effective and portable. Psychological Science, 20, 516–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, M. A., Kowitz, M. D., & Dunay, P. K. (1989). Altering memory through recall: The effects of cue-guided retrieval processing. Memory & Cognition, 17, 423–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, M. A., & Masson, M. E. J. (1985). Altering memory representations through retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 371–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, M. A., & Fisher, R. P. (1991). Tests and test feedback as learning sources. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 16, 192–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D. S. (2004). SERT: Self-explanation reading training. Discourse Processes, 38, 130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miyatsu, T., & McDaniel, M. A. (2019). Adding the keyword mnemonic to retrieval practice: A potent combination for foreign language vocabulary learning? Memory & Cognition, 47, 1328–1343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, P. E., & Fritz, C. O. (2000). The name game: Using retrieval practice to improve the learning of names. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 6, 124–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, P. E., & Fritz, C. O. (2002). The improved name game: Better use of expanding retrieval practice. Memory, 10, 259–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, P. E., Fritz, C. O., Jackson, L., Nichol, E., & Roberts, E. (2005). Strategies for learning proper names: Expanding retrieval practice, meaning and imagery. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(6), 779–798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pan, S. C., & Rickard, T. C. (2018). Transfer of test-enhanced learning: Meta-analytic review and synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 144(7), 710–756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pashler, H., Cepeda, N. J., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2005). When does feedback facilitate learning of words? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(1), 3–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M., & Levin, J. R. (1981). The keyword method and recall of vocabulary words from definitions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 7(1), 72–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M., Levin, J. R., Hall, J. W., Miller, G. E., & Berry, J. K. (1980). The keyword method and foreign word acquisition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6(2), 163–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M., Levin, J. R., Kuiper, N. A., Bryant, S. L., & Michener, S. (1982). Mnemonic versus nonmnemonic vocabulary-learning strategies: Additional comparisons. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(5), 693–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M., Symons, S., McDaniel, M. A., Snyder, B. L., & Turnure, J. E. (1988). Elaborative interrogation facilitates acquisition of confusing facts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 268–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pyc, M. A., & Rawson, K. A. (2010). Why testing improves memory: Mediator effectiveness hypothesis. Science, 330(6002), 335. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1191465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rawson, K. A., & Dunlosky, J. (2022). Successive relearning: An underexplored but potent technique for obtaining and maintaining knowledge. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 31, 362–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rea, S. D., Wang, L., Muenks, K., & Yan, V. X. (2022). Students can (mostly) recognize effective learning, so why do they not do it? Journal of Intelligence, 10, 127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roediger, H. L., & Butler, A. C. (2011). The critical role of retrieval practice in long-term retention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 20–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006a). The power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 181–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roediger, H. L., III., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006b). Test-enhanced learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17, 249–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roediger, H. L., III., Putnam, A. L., & Smith, M. A. (2011). Ten benefits of testing and their applications to educational practice. In J. P. Mestre & B. H. Ross (Eds.), Psychology of learning and motivation: Cognition in education (Vol. 55, pp. 1–36). Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roelle, J., & Nückles, M. (2019). Generative learning versus retrieval practice in learning from text: The cohesion and elaborationof the text matters. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(8), 1341–1361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roelle, J., Schweppe, J., Endres, T., Luchner, A., von Aufschnaiter, C., Renkl, A., ... & Vorholzer, A. (2022). Combining retrieval practice and generative learning in educational contexts: Promises and challenges. Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie, 54 (4):142–150.

  • Rosenshine, B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S. (1996). Teaching students to generate questions: A review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66, 181–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, C. A. (2014). The effect of testing versus restudy on retention: a meta-analytic review of the testing effect. Psychological Bulletin, 140(6), 1432–1463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seifert, T. L. (1993). Effects of elaborative interrogation with prose passages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 642–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shriberg, L. K., Levin, J. R., McCormick, C. B., & Pressley, M. (1982). Learning about “famous” people via the keyword method. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(2), 238–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Susser, J. A., & McCabe, J. (2013). From the lab to the dorm room: Metacognitive awareness and use of spaced study. Instructional Science, 41(2), 345–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, R. C., & McDaniel, M. A. (2013). Testing and feedback effects on front-end control over later retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 437–450.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toppino, T. C., & Cohen, M. S. (2009). The testing effect and the retention interval: Questions and answers. Experimental Psychology, 56(4), 252–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trumbo, M. C. S., McDaniel, M. A., Hodge, G. K., Jones, A. P., Matzen, L. E., Kittinger, R. S., Kittinger, L. I., & Clark, V. P. (2021). Is the testing effect ready to be put to work?: Evidence from the laboratory to the classroom. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 7(3), 332–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valentine, T., Brennen, T., & Bredart, S. (1996). The cognitive psychology of proper names. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Vestergren, P., & Nyberg, L. (2014). Testing alters brain activity during subsequent restudy: Evidence for test-potentiated encoding. Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 3(2), 69–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, D. A., & Jenkins, J. J. (1973). Effects of orienting tasks on free recall in incidental learning: “Difficulty”, “ effort”, and “process” explanations. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 481–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whiffin, J. W., & Karpicke, J. D. (2017). The role of episodic context in retrieval practice effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43, 1036–1046.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to Julie Bugg and Gilles Einstein for comments on an earlier version of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark A. McDaniel.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Test-Enhanced Learning and Testing in Education: Contemporary Perspectives and Insights.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

McDaniel, M.A. Combining Retrieval Practice with Elaborative Encoding: Complementary or Redundant?. Educ Psychol Rev 35, 75 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09784-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09784-8

Keywords

Navigation