ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2024
Far transfer of retrieval-practice benefits: rule-based learning as the underlying mechanism.
Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Linking digital competence, self-efficacy, and digital stress to perceived interactivity in AI-supported learning contexts.Scientific reports · 2025Article
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
Benefits of self-testing for learning have been consistently shown for simple materials such as word lists learned by rote memorization. Considerably less evidence for such benefits exists for complex, more educationally relevant materials and its application to new situations. The present study explores the mechanisms underlying this transfer. To this end, a typical retrieval-practice-effect paradigm was applied to foster the learning of an artificial language. Participants either repeatedly studied grammatically correct exemplar sentences of the artificial language or engaged in a cloze test as the interim test after learning. To assess far transfer, participants in both groups of restudy and retrieval practice engaged in a grammaticality judgment test after a delay of 5 min and 1 week. In addition, participants in both groups completed a final memory test (i.e., a cloze test identical to the initial test) 1 week after learning. In addition to a long-term memory benefit of retrieval practice, results revealed also a retrieval-practice benefit in the far-transfer test after the 1-week delay. The findings further support the view that far transfer is supported by learning the underlying grammatical rules as opposed to memorizing the material. Thus, retrieval practice is also effective for fostering learning of complex materials and, even more importantly, for promoting transfer of learning-a crucial goal in modern educational practices.
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.