Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T07:13:10.404Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

19 - Multiple-Choice and Short-Answer Quizzing on Equal Footing in the Classroom

Potential Indirect Effects of Testing

from Part IV - General Learning Strategies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2019

By
Mark A. McDaniel  and
Jeri L. Little
Edited by
John Dunlosky  and
Katherine A. Rawson
John Dunlosky
Affiliation:
Kent State University, Ohio
Katherine A. Rawson
Affiliation:
Kent State University, Ohio
Get access

Summary

Testing is a valuable pedagogical tool. In generalizing from laboratory to classroom experiments, one theoretical puzzle is that classroom studies often fail to find an anticipated benefit of short-answer quiz formats relative to multiple-choice quiz formats on final exam performance. We reconcile this surprising finding by appealing to indirect effects of tests.
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Cognition and Education , pp. 480 - 499
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agarwal, P. K., D’Antonio, L., Roediger, H. L., McDermott, K. B., & McDaniel, M. A. (2014). Classroom-based programs of retrieval practice reduce middle school and high school students’ test anxiety. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 3, 131–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agarwal, P. K., Roediger, H. L., McDaniel, M. A., & McDermott, K. B. (2013). How to use retrieval practice to improve learning. Washington: University in St. Louis.Google Scholar
Anderson, R. C. & Biddle, W. B. (1975). On asking people questions about what they are reading. In Bower, G. H. (ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation, Vol. 9 (pp. 89–132). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. L. C. (1991). Effects of frequent classroom testing. The Journal of Educational Research, 85(2), 89–99.Google Scholar
Belluck, P. (2011). To really learn, quit studying and take a test. New York Times. January 20, 2011.Google Scholar
Bjork, R. A. & Bjork, E. L. (1992). A new theory of disuse and an old theory of stimulus fluctuation. In Healy, A., Kosslyn, S., & Shiffrin, R. (eds.), From learning processes to cognitive processes: Essays in honor of William K. Estes, Vol. 2 (pp. 35–67). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bjork, E. L., Little, J. L., & Storm, B. C. (2014). Multiple-choice testing as a desirable difficulty in the classroom. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 3, 165–170.Google Scholar
Bjork, E. L., Soderstrom, N. C., & Little, J. L. (2015). Can multiple-choice testing induce desirable difficulties? Evidence from the laboratory and the classroom. The American Journal of Psychology, 128, 229–239.Google Scholar
Buhay, D. Best, L. A., & McGuire, K. (2010). The effectiveness of library instruction: Do students response systems (clickers) enhance learning? The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 1, 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, A. C. & Roediger, H. L. (2007). Testing improves long-term retention in a simulated classroom setting. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 514–527.Google Scholar
Butler, A. C. & Roediger, H. L. (2008). Feedback enhances the positive effects and reduces the negative effects of multiple-choice testing. Memory and Cognition, 36, 604–616.Google Scholar
Carey, B. (2010). Forget what you know about good study habits. New York Times. September 6, 2010.Google Scholar
Carpenter, S. K. (2009). Cue strength as a moderator of the testing effect: The benefits of elaborative retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 1563–1569.Google Scholar
Carroll, M., Campbell-Ratcliffe, J., Murnane, H., & Perfect, T. (2007). Retrieval-induced forgetting in educational contexts: Monitoring, expertise, text integration, and test format. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 580–606.Google Scholar
Chan, J. C. K. (2009). When does retrieval induce forgetting and when does it induce facilitation? Implications for retrieval inhibition, testing effect, and text processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 61, 153–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, J. C. K., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger, H. L. (2006). Retrieval-induced facilitation: Initially nontested material can benefit from prior testing of related material. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 553–571.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dunlosky, J. & Hertzog, C. (1998). Training programs to improve learning in later adulthood: Helping older adults educate themselves. In Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. C. (eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 249–275). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum .Google Scholar
Dunlosky, J. & Thiede, K. W. (1998). What makes people study more? An evaluation of factors that affect self-paced study. Acta Psychologica, 98, 37–56.Google Scholar
Fiorella, L. & Mayer, R. E. (2015). Learning as a generative activity: Eight learning strategies that promote understanding. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Glass, A. L., Brill, G., & Ingate, M. (2008). Combined online and in‐class pretesting improves exam performance in general psychology. Educational Psychology, 28, 483–503.Google Scholar
Glenberg, A. M. & Epstein, W. (1985). Calibration of comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 11, 702–718.Google Scholar
Glover, J. A. (1989). The” testing” phenomenon: Not gone but nearly forgotten. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 392–399.Google Scholar
Guynn, M. J. & McDaniel, M. A. (1999). Generate – sometimes recognize, sometimes not. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 398–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guynn, M. J., McDaniel, M. A., Strosser, G. L., Ramirez, J. M., Castleberry, E. H., & Arnett, K. H. (2014). Relational and item-specific influences on generate-recognize processes in recall. Memory and Cognition, 42, 198–211.Google Scholar
Halamish, V. & Bjork, R. A. (2011). When does testing enhance retention? A distribution-based interpretation of retrieval as a memory modifier. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(4), 801–812.Google Scholar
Hamaker, C. (1986). The effects of adjunct question on prose learning. Review of Educational Research, 56, 212–242.Google Scholar
Hartwig, M. K., & Dunlosky, J. (2012). Study strategies of college students: Are self-testing and scheduling related to achievement?. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 19, 126–134.Google Scholar
Jacoby, L. L. & Hollingshead, A. (1990). Toward a generate/recognize model of performance on direct and indirect tests of memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 433–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kang, S. H., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger, H. L., III (2007). Test format and corrective feedback modify the effect of testing on long-term retention. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 528–558.Google Scholar
Karpicke, J. D. (2009). Metacognitive control and strategy selection: Deciding to practice retrieval during learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138, 469–486. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017341CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
King, J. F., Zechmeister, E. B., & Shaughnessy, J. J. (1980). Judgments of knowing: The influence of retrieval-practice. American Journal of Psychology, 93, 329–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kintsch, W. (1978). More on recognition failure of recallable words: Implications for generation-recognition models. Psychological Review, 85, 470–473.Google Scholar
Koriat, A. & Bjork, R. A. (2006). Illusions of competence during study can be remedied by manipulations that enhance learners’ sensitivity to retrieval conditions at test. Memory and Cognition, 34, 959–972. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193244CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kornell, N. & Bjork, R. A. (2007). The promise and perils of self-regulated study. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 14, 219–224. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194055Google Scholar
Kornell, N. & Bjork, R. A. (2008). Optimising self-regulated study: The benefits – and costs – of dropping flashcards. Memory, 16(2), 125–136.Google Scholar
Kornell, N., Bjork, R. A., & Garcia, M. A. (2011). Why tests appear to prevent forgetting: A distribution-based bifurcation model. Journal of Memory and Language, 65, 85–97.Google Scholar
Kornell, N. & Rhodes, M. G. (2013). Feedback reduces the metacognitive benefit of tests. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 19, 1–13.Google Scholar
Kornell, N. & Son, L. K. (2009). Learners’ choices and beliefs about self-testing. Memory, 17, 493–501.Google Scholar
Kuo, T. & Hirshman, E. (1997). The role of distinctive perceptual information in memory: Studies of the testing effect. Journal of Memory and Language, 36, 188–201.Google Scholar
Lantz, M. E. & Stawiski, A. (2014). Effectiveness of clickers: Effect of feedback and the timing of questions on learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 280–286.Google Scholar
Larsen, D. P., Butler, A. C., & Roediger, H. L., III (2008). Test‐enhanced learning in medical education. Medical Education, 42(10), 959–966.Google Scholar
Leeming, F. C. (2002). The exam-a-day procedure improves performance in psychology classes. Teaching of Psychology, 29, 210–212.Google Scholar
Little, J. L. & Bjork, E. L. (2011). Pretesting with multiple-choice questions facilitates learning. In Carlson, L., Hölscher, C., & Shipley, T. (eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 294–299). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Little, J. L. & Bjork, E. L. (2015). Optimizing multiple-choice tests as tools for learning. Memory and Cognition, 43, 14–26.Google Scholar
Little, J. L. & Bjork, E. L. (2016). Multiple-choice pretesting potentiates learning of related information. Memory and Cognition, 44, 1085–1101.Google Scholar
Little, J. L., Bjork, E. L., Bjork, R. A., & Angello, G. (2012). Multiple-choice tests exonerated, at least of some charges fostering test-induced learning and avoiding test-induced forgetting. Psychological Science, 23, 1337–1344.Google Scholar
Little, J. L., Frickey, E. A., & Fung, A. K. (2018). The role of retrieval in answering multiple-choice questions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000638CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Little, J. L. & McDaniel, M. A. (2015). Metamemory monitoring and control following retrieval practice for text. Memory and Cognition, 43, 85–98.Google Scholar
Little, J. L., Storm, B. C., & Bjork, E. L. (2011). The costs and benefits of testing text materials. Memory, 19, 346–359.Google Scholar
Lovelace, E. A. (1984). Metamemory: Monitoring future recallability during study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 756–766.Google Scholar
Lyle, K. B. & Crawford, N. A. (2011). Retrieving essential material at the end of lectures improves performance on statistics exams. Teaching of Psychology, 38, 94–97.Google Scholar
Maki, R. H., Foley, J. M., Kajer, W. K., Thompson, R. C., & Willert, M. G. (1990). Increased processing enhances calibration of comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 16, 609–616.Google Scholar
Martin, N. D., Nguyen, K., & McDaniel, M. A. (2016). Structure building differences influence learning from educational text: Effects on encoding, retention, and metacognitive control. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 46, 52–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mawhinney, V. T., Bostow, D. E., Laws, D. R., Blumenfeld, G. J., & Hopkins, B. L. (1971). A comparison of students studying-behavior produced by daily, weekly, and three-week testing schedules. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 4, 257–264.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E., Stull, A., DeLeeuw, K., Almeroth, K., Bimber, B., Chun, D., Bulger, M., Campbell, J., Knight, A., & Zhang, H. (2009). Clickers in college classrooms: Fostering learning with questioning methods in large lecture classes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34, 51–57.Google Scholar
McDaniel, M. A., Agarwal, P. K., Huelser, B. J., McDermott, K. B., & RoedigerIII, H. L. (2011). Test-enhanced learning in a middle school science classroom: The effects of quiz frequency and placement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 399–414.Google Scholar
McDaniel, M. A., Anderson, J. L., Derbish, M. H., & Morrisette, N. (2007). Testing the testing effect in the classroom. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19(4–5), 494–513.Google Scholar
McDaniel, M. A., Bugg, J. M., Liu, Y., & Brick, J. (2015). When does the test-study-test sequence optimize learning and retention? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 21, 370–382.Google Scholar
McDaniel, M. A., Howard, D. C., & Einstein, G. O. (2009). The read-recite-review study strategy effective and portable. Psychological Science, 20(4), 516–522.Google Scholar
McDaniel, M. A. & Masson, M. E. (1985). Altering memory representations through retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11(2), 371–385.Google Scholar
McDaniel, M. A., Roediger, H. L., & McDermott, K. B. (2007). Generalizing test-enhanced learning from the laboratory to the classroom. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 14(2), 200–206.Google Scholar
McDaniel, M. A., Wildman, K. M., & Anderson, J. L. (2012). Using quizzes to enhance summative-assessment performance in a web-based class: An experimental study. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1(1), 18–26.Google Scholar
McDermott, K. B., Agarwal, P. K., D’Antonio, L., Roediger, H. L., III & McDaniel, M. A. (2014). Both multiple-choice and short-answer quizzes enhance later exam performance in middle and high school classes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 20, 3–21Google Scholar
Metcalfe, J. & Kornell, N. (2005). A region of proximal learning model of study time allocation. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 463–477.Google Scholar
Nelson, T. O. & Dunlosky, J. (1991). When people’s judgments of learning (JOLs) are extremely accurate at predicting subsequent recall: The “delayed-JOL effect.” Psychological Science, 2, 267–270.Google Scholar
Newble, D. I., Baxter, A., & Elmslie, R. G. (1979). A comparison of multiple-choice tests and free-response tests in examinations of clinical competence. Medical Education, 13, 263–268.Google Scholar
Peterson, D. J. & Mulligan, N. W. (2013). The negative testing effect and the multifactor account. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 1287–1293.Google ScholarPubMed
Pyc, M. A. & Rawson, K. A. (2010). Why testing improves memory: Mediator effectiveness hypothesis. Science, 330, 335.Google Scholar
Raaijmakers, J. G. & Shiffrin, R. M. (1981). Search of associative memory. Psychological Review, 88(2), 93–134.Google Scholar
Rawson, K. A., Dunlosky, J., & Thiede, K. W. (2000). The rereading effect: Metacomprehension accuracy improves across reading trials. Memory and Cognition, 28, 1004–1010.Google Scholar
Roediger, H. L. & Butler, A. C. (2011). The critical role of retrieval practice in long-term retention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 20–27.Google Scholar
Roediger, H. L. & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). The power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 181–210.Google Scholar
Roediger, H. L., III, Putnam, A. L., & Smith, M. A. (2011). Ten benefits of testing and their applications to educational practice. In Mestre, J. P. & Ross, B. H. (eds.), Psychology of learning and motivation: Cognition in education, Vol. 55 (pp. 1–36). Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Rowland, C. A. (2014). The effect of testing versus restudy on retention: A meta-analytic review of the testing effect. Psychological Bulletin, 140, 1432–1463.Google Scholar
Smith, M. K., Wood, W. B., Adams, W. K., Wieman, C., Knight, J. K., Guild, N., & Su, T. T. (2009). Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions. Science, 323(5910), 122–124.Google Scholar
Soderstrom, N. C. & Bjork, R. A. (2014). Testing facilitates the regulation of subsequent study time. Journal of Memory and Language, 73, 99–115.Google Scholar
Thomas, A. K. & Mcdaniel, M. A. (2007). Metacomprehension for educationally relevant materials: Dramatic effects of encoding-retrieval interactions. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 14, 212–218.Google Scholar
Trumbo, M. C., Leiting, K. A., McDaniel, M. A., & Hodge, G. K. (2016). Effects of reinforcement on test-enhanced learning in a large, diverse introductory college psychology course. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied.Google Scholar
Tullis, J. G., Finley, J. R., & Benjamin, A. S. (2013). Metacognition of the testing effect: Guiding learners to predict the benefits of retrieval. Memory and Cognition, 41, 429–442.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×