Cited by 357Mathematics Education and PedagogyVisual and Cognitive Learning ProcessesMathematics Education and Teaching Techniques

The shuffling of mathematics problems improves learning

Rohrer, Doug, Taylor, Kelli·2007·Instructional Science

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11251-007-9015-8

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rohrer, D., & Taylor, K.
Affiliations
University of South Florida (US)
Corresponding author
Rohrer, Doug
Venue
Instructional Science
Published
2007-04-19
Volume
35
Issue
6
Pages
481-498
ISSN
  • 0020-4277 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-1952
OpenAlex
W1966731838
Cited by
357
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 35 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 9
FWCI
5.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Instructional Science (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Applied Mathematics › Mathematics Education and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
  • Social Sciences › Education › Mathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
Keywords
mathematics learning, practice questions, spaced practice, massed practice, mixed practice, blocked practice, mathematics textbooks

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