Lentes intraoculares tóricas pseudofáquicas

The memorial benefits of practice tests have been documented across a wide range of materials including foreign language word pairs (e.g., Pyc & Rawson, 2009), text passages (Roediger & Karpicke, 2006b), statistics (e.g., Lyle & Crawford, 2011), general knowledge facts (e.g., Carpenter, Pashler, Wixted, & Vul, 2008), world history (e.g., Roediger, Agarwal, McDaniel, & McDermott, 2011), science (McDaniel, Agarwal, Huelser, McDermott, & Roediger, 2011) and map learning (e.g., Carpenter & Pashler, 2007).

The benefits of retrieval practice are more pronounced as the delay between encoding and a final test increases. For example, Roediger and Karpicke (Experiment 2, 2006b) had students initially read a text passage. Students then had three more practice trials in which they either read the passage three more times (SSSS), read the passage two more times and then took one free recall test (SSST), or did not read the passage again and took three free recall tests (STTT). Participants then completed a final free recall test either five minutes or one week later. The test involved just giving the students the name of the passage and asking them to recall as much of it as they could. Researchers scored the number of idea units (simple content phrases the text was parsed into for scoring purposes) recalled. Results are reported in the figure below. For the groups that had the final test five minutes after learning, the greatest benefit came from reading the text multiple times, and the single study-multiple test condition showed poorest performance. In other words, on an immediate test, cramming works. However, when the delayed final test was given one week later, the opposite pattern of results were obtained: Recall was best when students had been tested three times during practice and worst when they had read the passage four times. This outcome occurred despite the fact that students rereading the text were exposed to 100% of the material each time whereas students being tested were only exposed to what they could recall. These results nicely illustrate the powerful influence of testing on long-term retention and highlight the interaction between learning condition and retention interval (the delay between learning and final test).

Figure 1.From Roediger & Karpicke (2006, Psychological Science, volume 17, issue 3, p 253, Copyright ©2006 Association for Psychological Science, reprinted by permission of SAGE publications). On an immediate final test, performance is highest when practice involves more study trials versus test trials. However, on a delayed final test, performance is highest when practice involves more test trials versus study trials.

The benefits of practice tests also obtain when retrieval from memory is covert (thinking of, but not explicitly stating a response). For example, Carpenter and Pashler (2007) had students learn maps so that they could recreate the map on a later test (see a sample map below). After initial study, students either studied the map again or engaged in covert test practice. For test practice, features (e.g., house) were removed and students were asked to think about which feature was missing. Thirty minutes later, students were asked to recreate the map with all of the features they could recall. Results showed that students who engaged in covert practice tests were more accurate in their final drawing than were those who received study practice. These results demonstrate that the memorial benefits of practice tests are not dependent upon overt retrieval of information. Additional research has shown that covert retrieval practice is as good as overt practice in benefitting later retention (Smith, Roediger, & Karpicke, in press) and, further, that it does not matter whether students using overt practice type or speak their answers on the initial tests – both methods produce a robust testing effect (Putnam & Roediger, 2013).

Figure 2. Carpenter and Pashler created two maps, one of a town (upper panel), and one of a

recreational area (lower panel). Each map contained four roads, two rivers, and six additional features such as a school or golf course. The original maps contained colors such as blue (for the lake, ocean, and rivers), green (for the trees and golf course), and red (for the school and first aid station). Each subject learned both of the maps, one through completing a test with feedback (test/study) that lasted 120 sec, and the other through engaging in additional study time (study) for 120 sec. Each subject was randomly assigned to one of four different counterbalancing conditions to learn both of the maps.

With kind permission from Springer Science and Business Media, Springer and the Psychonomic Society (Carpenter, S. K., & Pashler, H. (2007). Testing beyond words: Using tests to enhance visuospatial map learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14 (3), 474-478. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, Figure 1, Copyright 2007 Psychonomic Society, Inc) given to the publication in which the material was originally published.

The benefits of practice tests even obtain when information is not recalled, provided that the correct answer is given after the test (e.g., Hays, Kornell, & Bjork, 2013; Kornell, Hays, & Bjork, 2009). Across a series of experiments, Kornell et al. (2009) evaluated the extent to which the benefits of practice tests are dependent upon correctly retrieving information. Students were asked to learn weakly associated items (e.g., whale – mammal) so that they could recall them on a later test. Students were assigned to either study the items or to receive a test trial (followed by feedback) with the items. For study trials, the entire pair was presented together for students to study. For test trials, only the first item was presented and students were to guess the correct answer and were then provided with the correct answer. Given that the items were weakly associated, almost all items were incorrectly recalled on test trials. After a delay, students received a final cued recall test in which they were provided with half of the pair (e.g., whale) and asked to generate the word associated with it (e.g., mammal). Results are presented below for four of their experiments and show that students who received the practice test trial recalled a greater proportion of items on the final test compared to students who received the practice study trial. Thus, even when retrieval is unsuccessful, practice tests are beneficial for memory.

Figure 3. Reprinted with permission (from Kornell, N., Hays, M. J., & Bjork, R. A., 2009. Unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhance subsequent learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 35, 989-998, published by APA). Final test performance is greater after test versus study practice even when items are initially not retrieved during encoding.

Although the majority of research has been conducted on college-aged students, a growing body of work has shown that the benefits of testing extend to all age groups from young children to older adults (e.g., Logan & Balota, 2008; Metcalfe & Kornell, 2007). For example, Rohrer, Taylor, and Sholar (2010) had children in the fourth and fifth grades learn the names and locations of cities on a map. The children learned the map by either studying the map or having a practice test (followed by feedback) of the cities on the map. They assessed performance on a final test one day later and the test was either the same as the prior test (standard) or a transfer test (designed to evaluate how information

generalizes from one context to another). The figure below (adapted from Rohrer et al., 2010) shows accuracy for each practice group as a function of the final test type. For both types of final test, performance was substantially greater when the maps had been learned via practice tests versus concentrated study.

M

ea

n P

ro

po

rt

io

n o

f I

te

m

s R

ec

al

le

d

Figure 4. Replotted from Rohrer et al., 2010. In a study with young children, final test accuracy was greater when the children engaged in test versus study practice. The effect was robust for both standard and transfer final test formats.

Although prior research has firmly established the memorial benefits of practice tests (compared to study), research has shown that the benefits of practice tests are even greater when tests are followed by feedback (e.g., Bangert-Drowns, Kulik, Kulik, & Morgan, 1991; Cull, 2000), especially for items that are incorrectly recalled on test trials (Pashler, Cepeda, Wixted, & Rohrer, 2005). For example, Pashler et al. (2005) had students learn Luganda vocabulary items (e.g., leero – today) so that they could recall the English word when prompted with the foreign language word. After items were initially studied two times, students had two test trials with each item in which they were provided with the foreign language word (e.g., leero) and asked to retrieve the English translation (e.g., today). Of interest for present purposes, students either received no feedback after test trials or were provided with the correct answer. One week later they completed a final test with each item and they were again provided with the foreign language word and asked to recall the English translation. Results showed that performance was greatest on the final test when students were provided with the correct answer after test trials during practice. Butler, Karpicke, & Roediger (2008) showed that, for more complex materials, feedback can also help students even when they get the answer correct (and especially when they provide a correct answer with low confidence).

In addition to research demonstrating that the memorial benefits of practice tests are greater than practice involving restudy of information, research has also shown that the amount and timing of tests influences the likelihood that information will be recallable at a later time. For example, Pyc and Rawson (2009) had students learn Swahili-English word pairs (e.g., wingu-cloud) until items could be recalled to a certain criterion level of performance during practice (between 1 and 10 correct recalls). They manipulated the amount of time between correct retrievals during practice, such that some items had a short lag (6 other items) between test trials and others had a long lag (34 items) between tests. Students were given a final recall test either 25 minutes after learning items or one week later. The figure below shows performance on the final test as a function of the number of times items were recalled (i.e., criterion level) and the amount of time between correct retrievals (short or long lag, which was about 1 or 6 minutes between retrievals) during practice. Results showed that performance

increased as the number of correct recalls during practice increased (see the figure below, adapted from Pyc & Rawson, 2009). Results also showed that the amount of time between correct recalls

substantially influenced the likelihood that information could be recalled on a later test. Performance was always greatest when there was a long lag versus a short lag between correct recalls. In fact, when the final test occurred one week later and items were learned with a short lag, performance was on the floor. Even ten successful retrievals a week before did not help learning the material (relative to one retrieval). Thus, for the short lag condition, the extra time spent practicing retrieval was essentially wasted for these students. This outcome points to the importance of having spaced retrieval. When retrieval is made too easy, retrieval practice fails to benefit recall (see too Karpicke & Roediger, 2007).

Figure 5. Replotted from Pyc & Rawson (2009). Performance improves as criterion level increases and is greater for long lag versus short lag items. The memorial benefits of lag are particularly robust at a long retention interval.

Importantly, research has shown that the memorial benefits of practice tests are not dependent upon the match between the format of the practice test and final test. For example, Carpenter and DeLosh (2006) had participants learn lists of words. After an initial study trial with items, participants either studied the list again, had a multiple choice test, a cued-recall test, or a free recall test. After a short retention interval participants were asked to recall the list of words they had just learned. Depending upon the group to which each participant was assigned, the format of the final test was multiple choice, cued-recall, or free recall. Performance was greatest on the final test, regardless of the final test format, when participants received a free recall test during practice. These results suggest that when students exert more effort during encoding (i.e., free recall vs. cued-recall or multiple choice), they perform better on a final test, regardless of the format of the final test (free recall, cued-recall, or multiple choice formats). However, more recent work has shown that the format of practice tests does not influence the size of testing effects (McDermott et al., in press).