Student study techniques and the generation effect.
Abstract
In 2 experiments, the generation effect, which occurs when individuals remember materials they have generated (and, thus, targeted) better than materials generated (and targeted) by others, was investigated. The effect has not generally been found in natural settings when total test performance was examined. The examination of total performance rather than just targeted items may mask the effect because items not studied (nontargets) are included. In Experiment 1, groups were compared that generated their own outlines or study questions with groups that received experimenter-generated materials. Test scores showed generation effects for target items. In Experiment 2, students who generated questions were compared with yoked students who used those student-generated questions
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Research studies have shown that pupils trained to prepare for examinations by generating and then answering their own questions out-performed comparable groups who prepared in conventional ways.
“A further idea has been introduced by research studies (Foos et al., 1994;King, 1992) which have shown that pupils trained to prepare for examinations by generating and then answering their own questions out-performed comparable groups who prepared in conventional ways.”
From Working inside the Black Box: Assessment for Learning in the Classroom (2004) · cites this paper as Foos et al., 1994
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Assessment and Classroom Learning
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998) · Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice · doi:10.1080/0969595980050102 · Cited by 8,152 · see citing works
Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning?
Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0021017 · Cited by 1,338 · see citing works
Working inside the Black Box: Assessment for Learning in the Classroom
Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2004) · Phi Delta Kappan · doi:10.1177/003172170408600105 · Cited by 1,323 · see citing works
The worked example effect, the generation effect, and element interactivity.
Chen, O., Kalyuga, S., & Sweller, J. (2015) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/edu0000018 · Cited by 167 · see citing works
Western University, Sedig, K., Parsons, P., & Western University (2013) · AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.17705/1thci.00055 · Cited by 145 · see citing works
Formative Assessment: Improving Learning in Secondary Classrooms
OECD (2005) · doi:10.1787/9789264007413-en · Cited by 123 · see citing works
Ebersbach, M., Feierabend, M., & Nazari, K. B. B. (2020) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.3639 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
- Authors
- Foos, P. W., Mora, J. J., & Tkacz, S.
- Affiliations
- University of North Carolina at Charlotte (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Educational Psychology
- Published
- 1994-12
- Volume
- 86
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 567-576
- ISSN
- 0022-0663 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-2176
- OpenAlex
- W1987277818
- Cited by
- 121
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 0.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Educational Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Keywords
- generation effect, self-generated questions
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
