Rice University a Thesis Submitted in Partial
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
RICE UNIVERSITY Transfer of the Testing Effect: Just How Powerful Is It? by Gunes Avci A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE Doctor of Philosophy APPROVED, THESIS COMMITTEE: , A s· tant Professor, Chair Psychology ~wr.~1 Psychology Suzanne Kemmer, Associate Professor Linguistics HOUSTON, TX APRIL 2011 ABSTRACT Transfer of the testing effect: Just how powerful is it? by Gunes Avci Researchers have repeatedly showed that when students take a test on the studied materials, their retention of information increases on later exams. The memory gain produced by tests is called the testing effect. The testing effect has been demonstrated with different materials (e.g., word lists, prose), with different designs (e.g., within-subjects, between-subjects), with different age groups and with different settings (e.g., laboratory, classroom). This thesis offers a novel approach to the assessment of the testing effect: the transfer of the testing effect. Although research on the testing effect has been flourishing over the last decade, transfer of the effect has not been studied systematically. In this context, the transfer of the testing effect refers to whether a learner can utilize the memory gain produced by tests in different contexts. The present study examined the transfer of the testing effect in the temporal domain which refers to retention of the testing effect over a period of time (Experiment 1, Experiment 2, Experiment 3 and Experiment 4), the knowledge domain which refers to transfer of the testing effect across different levels of learning (Experiment 1, Experiment 2 and Experiment 3) and the modality domain which concerns how the format of the tests influence the testing effect (Experiment 4). In addition to the laboratory studies, Experiment 3 was conducted in an actual classroom setting incorporating real classroom curriculum. The study revealed that the testing effect endures over a long period of time varying between 1 and 12 weeks and is transferable across different levels of learning (i.e., lower level and higher level). Furthermore, the testing effect is affected by the differences III in the format of tests. The transferability of the testing effect across different domains indicated that the testing effect reflects more than rote learning. The findings of the study were discussed in light of two competing theoretical orientations explaining the testing effect: the retrieval hypothesis and the transfer-appropriate processing framework. Additionally, the practical implications of the study were discussed in relation to the educational system. Acknowledgements First and foremost, I am heartily thankful to my advisor, Dr. Jessica Logan, whose encouragement, supervision, and support at every step of my research enabled me to develop an understanding of the subject. It has been an honor to be her first Ph.D. student. I appreciate all her contributions of time and ideas to make my Ph.D. experience productive and stimulating. For sharing their time and expertise, I would like to express my appreciation to the members of the committee: Dr. Fred Oswald and Dr. Suzanne Kemmer. Additionally, I would like to thank the members of the Logan group whose comments, constructive criticisms, and support have contributed immensely to my professional time at Rice University. Last, but not least, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my favorite Ukrainian for being moral support and for keeping my spirits high throughout graduate school. I would like to dedicate my dissertation to my dear family, my father, my mother, and my sister. Without their unconditional support and love, I could not have gotten through this. Table of Contents Acknowledgment ............................................................................................. iv Table of Contents .............................................................................................v List of Figures ................................................................................................viii List of Tables ...................................................................................................ix Introduction ..................................................................................................... 1 1.1. The Testing Effect: The Paradigm ................................................................ 1 1.2. The Testing Effect in the Laboratory and in the Classroom ....................................2 1.3. Theories of the Testing Effect. ...................................................................... 7 1.3.1. OverlearninglExposure Hypothesis ........................................................ 7 1.3.2. Retrieval Hypothesis ....................................................................... 10 1.3.3. Transfer-Appropriate Processing View ................................................. 14 1.4. Transfer of Learning ............................................................................... 16 1.4.1. Dimensions of Transfer of Learning ..................................................... 17 1.5. Transfer of the Testing Effect .....................................................................20 1.5.1. Transfer in the Temporal Domain ........................................................20 1.5.2. Transfer in the Modality Domain ........................................................ .22 1.5.3. Transfer in the Knowledge Domain ..................................................... .25 1.5.4. Evaluation of the theories with respect to the transfer of the testing effect in modality, temporal and knowledge domain ................................................29 The Present Study .............................................................................................30 2.1.Experiment 1 .......................................................................................... 35 2.1.1. Method ....................................................................................... 36 2. 1. 1. I.Participants .............................................................................. 36 2.1.1.2.Materials ................................................................................. 36 2.1.1.3.Design ....................................................................................37 2.1.1.4.Procedure ............................................................................... .38 2.1.2. Results ........................................................................................ 39 vi 2.1.3. Discussion ................................................................................... .40 2.2.Experiment 2 .........................................................................................41 2.2.1. Method .......................................................................................42 2.2.1.1.Participants ...............................................................................42 2.2.1.2.Materials ...................................................................................43 2.2.1.3.Design .....................................................................................43 2.2.1.4.Procedure ...............................................................................46 2.2.2. Results ....................................................................................... 46 2.2.2.1.1nitial Test Performance .............................................................. ,46 2.2.2.2.Final Test Performance ............................................................... .47 2.2.2.3.Forgetting Rate and the Testing Effect .............................................. 50 2.2.3. Discussion ................................................................................... 51 2.3.Experiment 3 ......................................................................................... 53 2.3.1. Method ....................................................................................... 53 2.3.l.l.Participants .............................................................................. 53 2.3.1.2.Materials .................................................................................. 54 2.3.l.3.Design ................................................................................... 55 2.3.1.4.Procedure ................................................................................ 55 2.3.2. Results ........................................................................................ 56 2.3.3. Discussion ................................................................................... 59 2.4.Experiment 4 ......................................................................................... 60 2.4.1. Method ....................................................................................... 62 2.4.1.1.Participants ..............................................................................62 2.4.1.2.Materials ..................................................................................62 2.4.1.3.Design ................................................................................... 63 2.4.1.4.Procedure ................................................................................64 2.4.2. Results ........................................................................................ 65 2.4.2.1.Scoring ................................................................................... 65 2,4.2.2.1nitial Test Performance .............................................................65 2,4.2.3.Final Test Performance