The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Examining the testing effect with open‐ and closed‐book tests
Abstract
Two experiments examined the testing effect with open‐book tests, in which students view notes and textbooks while taking the test, and closed‐book tests, in which students take the test without viewing notes or textbooks. Subjects studied prose passages and then restudied or took an open‐ or closed‐book test. Taking either kind of test, with feedback, enhanced long‐term retention relative to conditions in which subjects restudied material or took a test without feedback. Open‐book testing led to better initial performance than closed‐book testing, but this benefit did not persist and both types of testing produced equivalent retention on a delayed test. Subjects predicted they would recall more after repeated studying, even though testing enhanced long‐term retention more than restudying. These experiments demonstrate that the testing effect occurs with both open‐ and closed‐book tests, and that subjects fail to predict the effectiveness of testing relative to studying in enhancing later recall. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Flesch, R. (1948) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0057532 · Cited by 5,391
Test-Enhanced Learning: Taking Memory Tests Improves Long-Term Retention
Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x · Cited by 2,867
Self-citationThe power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice
Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00012.x · Cited by 2,037
Self-citationMonitoring one’s own knowledge during study: A cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning
Koriat, A. (1997) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.126.4.349 · Cited by 1,363
The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events.
Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C.-L. C., Kulik, J. A., & Morgan, M. (1991) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543061002213 · Cited by 1,313
Memory and Metamemory Considerations in the Training of Human Beings
Bjork, R. A. (1994) · Metacognition · doi:10.7551/mitpress/4561.003.0011 · Cited by 1,084
Testing the testing effect in the classroom
McDaniel, M. A., Anderson, J. L., Derbish, M. H., & Morrisette, N. (2007) · European Journal of Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1080/09541440701326154 · Cited by 563
Testing improves long-term retention in a simulated classroom setting
Butler, A. C., & Roediger, H. L. (2007) · European Journal of Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1080/09541440701326097 · Cited by 434
Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2007) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition · doi:10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.704 · Cited by 421
Self-citationSummary knowledge of results for skill acquisition: Support for the guidance hypothesis.
Schmidt, R. A., Young, D. E., Swinnen, S., & Shapiro, D. C. (1989) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition · doi:10.1037/0278-7393.15.2.352 · Cited by 407
Cited by
Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100612453266 · Cited by 3,138
The power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice
Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00012.x · Cited by 2,037
Self-citationKarpicke, J. D., Butler, A. C., & Roediger III, H. L. (2009) · Memory · doi:10.1080/09658210802647009 · Cited by 745
Self-citationRethinking the Use of Tests: A Meta-Analysis of Practice Testing
Adesope, O. O., Trevisan, D. A., & Sundararajan, N. (2017) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654316689306 · Cited by 544
Feedback enhances the positive effects and reduces the negative effects of multiple-choice testing
Butler, A. C., & Roediger, H. L. (2008) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/mc.36.3.604 · Cited by 457
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Agarwal, P. K., Karpicke, J. D., Kang, S. H. K., Roediger, H. L., & McDermott, K. B.
- Venue
- Applied Cognitive Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-09-19
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 861-876
- ISSN
- 0888-4080 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-0720
- OpenAlex
- W2114351818
- Cited by
- 342
- References
- 13
- FWCI
- 2.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Examining the testing effect with open‐ and closed‐book tests. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/acp.1391
- The paper
- Agarwal, P. K., Karpicke, J. D., Kang, S. H. K., Roediger, H. L., & McDermott, K. B. (2008). Examining the testing effect with open‐ and closed‐book tests. Applied Cognitive Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1391
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
