Abstract
The current study examined whether the learning benefits of pretesting—like those produced by posttesting—generalize to classroom settings, and whether such benefits transfer to non-pretested related information. Before some lectures but not others, undergraduate students enrolled in a large research methods class were given a brief competitive multiple-choice pretest on topics that were then covered in a lecture occurring immediately following the pretest. The pretests were not seen by the lecturer. On a final exam that was given at the end of the academic term, it was found that pretesting enhanced learning of both pretested and non-pretested related material compared to control questions. On a follow-up questionnaire, students reported taking the pretests seriously and being generally aware when pretested topics were later discussed in the lectures. Furthermore, many students reported using the pretests to guide their own study behavior. Thus, a combination of two mechanisms—namely, increased attentional processing during class and enhanced self-regulated study outside of class—may have contributed to the current pretesting effect. Although much more research in this area is needed, our results suggest that students’ learning can profit from short, low-stakes, competitive multiple-choice pretests being deployed in the classroom.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
Data are available upon request.
Notes
An effort was made to construct pairs of questions that were not related, at least in any obvious way, to the other pairs. Admittedly, however, all the topics covered in the course were related to research methods used in psychological research.
Two questions—one Identical and one Related—were deemed too easy (they were answered correctly over 85% of the time) and were, therefore, excluded from all reported analyses.
References
Agarwal, P. K., D’Antonio, L., Roediger, H. L., III., McDermott, K. B., & McDaniel, M. A. (2014). Classroom-based programs of retrieval practice reduce middle school and high school students’ test anxiety. Journal of Applied Research in Memory & Cognition, 3(3), 131–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2014.07.002
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(3), 940–945. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029199
Beckman, W. S. (2008). Pre-testing as a method of conveying learning objectives. Journal of Aviation/aerospace Education & Research, 17(2), 61–70. https://doi.org/10.15394/jaaer.2008.1447
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.
Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013). Self-Regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 417–444. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143823
Bjork, E. L., Little, J. L., & Storm, B. C. (2014). Multiple-choice testing as a desirable difficulty in the classroom. Journal of Applied Research in Memory & Cognition, 3(3), 165–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2014.03.002
Carpenter, S. K., & Toftness, A. R. (2017). The effect of prequestions on learning from video presentations. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 6(1), 104–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2016.07.014
Carpenter, S. K., Rahman, S., & Perkins, K. (2018). The effects of prequestions on classroom learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 24(1), 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000145
Chan, J. C. K., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger, H. L. (2006). Retrieval-induced facilitation: Initially nontested material can benefit from prior testing of related material. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135(4), 553–571. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.553
de Lima, N. K., & Jaeger, A. (2020). The effects of prequestions versus postquestions on memory retention in children. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 9(4), 555–563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.08.005
Geller, J., Carpenter, S. K., Lamm, M. H., Rahman, S., Armstrong, P. I., & Coffman, C. R. (2017). Prequestions do not enhance the benefits of retrieval in a STEM classroom. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-017-0078-z
Hausman, H., & Rhodes, M. G. (2018). When pretesting fails to enhance learning concepts from reading texts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 24(3), 331–346. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000160
Huelser, B. J., & Metcalfe, J. (2012). Making related errors facilitates learning, but learners do not know it. Memory & Cognition, 40(4), 514–527. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-011-0167-z
Izawa, C. (1966). Reinforcement-test sequences in paired-associate learning. Psychological Reports, 18(3), 879–919. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1966.18.3.879
Janelli, M., & Lipnevich, A. A. (2021). Effects of pre-tests and feedback on performance outcomes and persistence in Massive Open Online Courses. Computers & Education, 161, 104076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104076
Kane, J. H., & Anderson, R. C. (1978). Depth of processing and interference effects in the learning and remembering of sentences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70(4), 626–635. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.70.4.626
Kornell, N., Hays, M. J., & Bjork, R. A. (2009). Unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhance subsequent learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(4), 989–998. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015729
Kornell, N., & Vaughn, K. E. (2016). How retrieval attempts affect learning: A review and synthesis. In B. H. Ross (Ed.), Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 65, pp. 183–215). Elsevier Academic Press.
Little, J. L., & Bjork, E. L. (2016). Multiple-choice pretesting potentiates learning of related information. Memory & Cognition, 44(7), 1085–1101. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-016-0621-z
Little, J. L., Bjork, E. L., Bjork, R. A., & Angello, G. (2012). Multiple-choice tests exonerated, at least of some charges: Fostering test-induced learning and avoiding test-induced forgetting. Psychological Science, 23(11), 1337–1344. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612443370
McDaniel, M. A., Agarwal, P. K., Huelser, B. J., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger III, H. L. (2011). Test-enhanced learning in a middle school science classroom: The effects of quiz frequency and placement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(2), 399–414. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021782
McDaniel, M. A., Thomas, R. C., Agarwal, P. K., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2013). Quizzing in middle-school science: Successful transfer performance on classroom exams. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27(3), 360–372. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2914
Metcalfe, J. (2017). Learning from errors. Annual Review of Psychology, 68, 465–489. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-044022
Neisser, U. (1976). Cognition and reality: Principles and implications of cognitive psychology. W. H. Freeman and Company.
Pan, S. C., Cooke, J., Little, J. L., McDaniel, M. A., Foster, E. R., Connor, L. T., & Rickard, T. C. (2019). Online and clicker quizzing on jargon terms enhances definition-focused but not conceptually focused biology exam performance. CBE Life Sciences Education, 18(4), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.18-12-0248
Pan, S. C., Sana, F., Schmitt, A., & Bjork, E. L. (2020). Pretesting reduces mind wandering and enhances learning during online lectures. Journal of Applied Research in Memory & Cognition, 9(4), 542–554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.07.004
Pan, S. C., & Sana, F. (2021). Pretesting versus posttesting: Comparing the pedagogical benefits of errorful generation and retrieval practice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 27(2), 237–257. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000345
Potts, R., & Shanks, D. R. (2014). The benefit of generating errors during learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(2), 644–667. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033194
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
Richland, L. E., Kornell, N., & Kao, L. S. (2009). The pretesting effect: Do unsuccessful tests enhance learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 15(3), 243–257. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016496
Roediger, H. L., III., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). The power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(3), 181–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00012.x
Roediger, H. L., Agarwal, P. K., McDaniel, M. A., & McDermott, K. B. (2011a). Test-enhanced learning in the classroom: Long-term improvements from quizzing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17(4), 382–395. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026252
Roediger, H. L., III., Putnam, A. L., & Smith, M. A. (2011b). Ten benefits of testing and their applications to educational practice. In J. Mestre & B. Ross (Eds.), Psychology of learning and motivation: Cognition in education (pp. 1–36). Elsevier Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-387691-1.00001-6
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. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037559
Sana, F., Forrin, N. D., Sharma, M., Dubljevic, T., Ho, P., Jalil, E., & Kim, J. A. (2020). Optimizing the efficacy of learning objectives through pretests. CBE Life Sciences Education, 19(3), ar43. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.19-11-0257
Sana, F., Yan, V. X., Clark, C. M., Bjork, E. L., & Bjork, R. A. (2021). Improving conceptual learning via pretests. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 27(2), 228–236. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000322
Slamecka, N. J., & Fevreiski, J. (1983). The generation effect when generation fails. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22(2), 153–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(83)90112-3
Soderstrom, N. C., & Bjork, R. A. (2014). Testing facilitates the regulation of subsequent study time. Journal of Memory and Language, 73, 99–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2014.03.003
Szpunar, K. K., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger III, 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013082
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 USA, 110(16), 6313–6317. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1221764110
Toftness, A. R., Carpenter, S. K., Lauber, S., & Mickes, L. (2018). The limited effects of prequestions on learning from authentic lecture videos. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 7(3), 370–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2018.06.003
Vaughn, K. E., & Rawson, K. A. (2012). When is guessing incorrectly better than studying for enhancing memory? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(5), 899–905. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0276-0
Wissman, K. T., Rawson, K. A., & Pyc, M. A. (2011). The interim test effect: Testing prior material can facilitate the learning of new material. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18(6), 1140–1147. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-011-0140-7
Yan, V. X., Yu, Y., Garcia, M. A., & Bjork, R. A. (2014). Why does guessing incorrectly enhance, rather than impair, retention? Memory & Cognition, 42(8), 1373–1383. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-014-0454-6
Yang, C., Liang, L., Vadillo, M. A., Yu, R., & Shanks, D. R. (2021). Testing (quizzing) boosts classroom learning: A systematic and meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 147(4), 399–435. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000309
Acknowledgements
We thank members of CogFog for insightful comments regarding this research.
Funding
Grant 29192G from the James S. McDonnell Foundation supported this research.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics Approval
This study was approval by the Institutional Review Board at the University of California, Los Angeles. The procedures used in this study adhere to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki.
Consent to Participate
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in this study.
Competing Interests
The authors have no competing interests to declare.
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.
About this article
Cite this article
Soderstrom, N.C., Bjork, E.L. Pretesting Enhances Learning in the Classroom. Educ Psychol Rev 35, 88 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09805-6
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09805-6