Expectancy of an open-book test decreases performance on a delayed closed-book test

Memory

Volumn 19, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 836-852

  Agarwal, Pooja K ^a   Roediger III , Henry L ^a  

^a WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Feedback; Open book tests; Test expectancy; Testing effect; Transfer

Indexed keywords

ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR; ADULT; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; LEARNING; LONG TERM MEMORY; MALE; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; STUDY SKILLS; TIME;

ADULT; FEEDBACK, PSYCHOLOGICAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PRACTICE (PSYCHOLOGY); PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; RETENTION (PSYCHOLOGY); TEST TAKING SKILLS; TIME FACTORS; TRANSFER (PSYCHOLOGY);

EID: 84858766393     PISSN: 09658211     EISSN: 14640686     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09658211.2011.613840     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Agarwal, P. K., Karpicke, J. D., Kang, S. H. K., Roediger, H. L. and McDermott, K. B. 2008. Examining the testing effect with open-and closed-book tests. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22: 861-876.
2. Barnett, S. M. and Ceci, S. J. 2002. When and where do we apply what we learn? A taxonomy for far transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 128: 612-637.
3. Butler, A. C. 2010. Repeated testing produces superior transfer of learning relative to repeated studying. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 36: 1118-1133.
4. Butler, A. C., Karpicke, J. D. and Roediger, H. L. 2008. Correcting a metacognitive error: Feedback increases retention of low-confidence correct responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 34: 918-928.
5. Carpenter, S. K. and DeLosh, E. L. 2006. Impoverished cue support enhances subsequent retention: Support for the elaborative retrieval explanation of the testing effect. Memory and Cognition, 34: 268-276.
6. College Board. 2009. The official SAT study guide (2nd ed.). New York, NY: College Board.
7. Duchastel, P. C. and Nungester, R. J. 1982. Testing effects measured with alternate test forms. Journal of Educational Research, 75: 309-313.
8. Educational Testing Service. 2002. Preparing for the verbal and quantitative sections of the GRE general test: Sample questions with explanations. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
9. Eilertsen, T. V. and Valdermo, O. 2000. Open-book assessment: A contribution to improved learning?. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 26: 91-103.
10. Farr, R., Pritchard, R. and Smitten, B. 1990. A description of what happens when an examinee takes a multiple-choice reading comprehension test. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27: 209-226.
11. Feldhusen, J. 1961. An evaluation of college students' reactions to open book examinations. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 21: 637-646.
12. Feller, M. 1994. Open-book testing and education for the future. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 20: 235-238.
13. Glover, J. A. 1989. The "testing" phenomenon: Not gone but nearly forgotten. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81: 392-399.
14. Graesser, A. C., Singer, M. and Trabasso, T. 1994. Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101: 371-395.
15. Ioannidou, M. K. 1997. Testing and life-long learning: Open-book and closed-book examination in a university course. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 23: 131-139.
16. Jacobs, L. C. and Chase, C. I. 1992. Developing and using tests effectively: A guide for faculty, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
17. Kang, S. H. K., McDermott, K. B. and Roediger, H. L. 2007. Test format and corrective feedback modify the effect of testing on long-term retention. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19: 528-558.
18. Karpicke, J. D. and Blunt, J. R. 2011. Retrieval practice produces more learning than elaborative studying with concept mapping. Science, 331: 772-775.
19. Karpicke, J. D., Butler, A. C. and Roediger, H. L. 2009. Metacognitive strategies in student learning: Do students practice retrieval when they study on their own?. Memory, 17: 471-479.
20. Kornell, N. and Bjork, R. A. 2007. The promise and perils of self-regulated study. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14: 219-224.
21. Kornell, N. and Bjork, R. A. 2008. Learning concepts and categories: Is spacing the enemy of induction?. Psychological Science, 19: 585-592.
22. Krathwohl, D. R. 2002. A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41: 212-218.
23. Marsh, E. J., Agarwal, P. K. and Roediger, H. L. 2009. Memorial consequences of answering SAT II questions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 15: 1-11.
24. Neely, J. H., & Balota, D. A. 1982. On inferring test-expectancy-induced encoding differences in recall and recognition: A methodological, empirical, and theoretical analysis. Unpublished manuscript, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
25. Pyc, M. A. and Rawson, K. A. 2007. Examining the efficiency of schedules of distributed retrieval practice. Memory & Cognition, 35: 1917-1927.
26. Rawson, K. A. and Dunlosky, J. 2007. Improving students' self-evaluation of learning for concepts in textbook materials. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19: 559-579.
27. Research & Education Association, Inc. 2008. The very best coaching and study course for the GRE General Test. Piscataway, NJ: Research & Education Association, Inc.
28. Roediger, H. L., Agarwal, P. K., Kang, S. H. K. and Marsh, E. J. 2010. Benefits of testing memory: Best practices and boundary conditions. In New frontiers in applied memory, Edited by: Davies, G. M. and Wright, D. B. 13-49. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
29. Roediger, H. L. and Karpicke, J. D. 2006a. The power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1: 181-210.
30. Roediger, H. L. and Karpicke, J. D. 2006b. Test-enhanced learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17: 249-255.
31. Rohrer, D. and Pashler, H. 2010. Recent research on human learning challenges conventional instructional strategies. Educational Researcher, 39: 406-412.
32. Rohrer, D. and Taylor, K. 2006. The effects of overlearning and distributed practise on the retention of mathematics knowledge. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20: 1209-1224.
33. Schmidt, S. R. 1980. Test expectancy and test appropriate processing in the retention of prose. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Washington University, St. Louis, MO.
34. Schmidt, S. R. 1983. The effects of recall and recognition test expectancies on the retention of prose. Memory & Cognition, 11: 172-180.
35. Schneider, W., Eschman, A. and Zuccolotto, A. 2002. E-Prime user's guide, Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.
36. Taylor, K. and Rohrer, D. 2010. The effects of interleaved practice. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24: 837-848.
37. Theophilides, C. and Koutselini, M. 2000. Study behavior in the closed-book and open-book examination: A comparative analysis. Educational Research and Evaluation, 6: 379-393.
38. Wheeler, M. A. and Roediger, H. L. 1992. Disparate effects of repeated testing: Reconciling Ballard's (1913) and Bartlett's (1932) results. Psychological Science, 3: 240-245.
39. Willingham, D. T. 2009. Why don't students like school: A cognitive scientist answers questions about how the mind works and what it means for the classroom, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.