ArticleFrontiers in psychology2018
Examining the Testing Effect in University Teaching: Retrievability and Question Format Matter.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The battle of question formats: a comparative study of retrieval practice using very short answer questions and multiple choice questions.BMC medical education · 2024Trial
- The influence of emotion regulation strategy on covert and overt retrieval practice effects.Psychological research · 2025Article
- Far transfer of retrieval-practice benefits: rule-based learning as the underlying mechanism.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2024Article
- Instructional Strategies to Enhance Dermoscopic Image Interpretation Education: a Review of the Literature.Dermatology practical & conceptual · 2022Review
- Learning With a Double-Edged Sword? Beneficial and Detrimental Effects of Learning Tests-Taking a First Look at Linkages Among Tests, Later Learning Outcomes, Stress Perceptions, and Intelligence.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Beyond the Distributed Practice Effect: Is Distributed Learning Also Effective for Learning With Non-repeated Text Materials?Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Review of learned material is crucial for the learning process. One approach that promises to increase the effectiveness of reviewing during learning is to answer questions about the learning content rather than restudying the material (testing effect). This effect is well established in lab experiments. However, existing research in educational contexts has often combined testing with additional didactical measures that hampers the interpretation of testing effects. We aimed to examine the testing effect in its pure form by implementing a minimal intervention design in a university lecture (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.