Cited by 51Memory Processes and InfluencesVisual and Cognitive Learning ProcessesInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods

Retrieving and applying knowledge to different examples promotes transfer of learning

Butler, Andrew C., Black-Maier, Allison C., Raley, Nathaniel D., Marsh, Elizabeth J.·2017·Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied

Abstract

Introducing variability during learning often facilitates transfer to new contexts (i.e., generalization). The goal of the present study was to explore the concept of variability in an area of research where its effects have received little attention: learning through retrieval practice. In four experiments, we investigated whether retrieval practice with different examples of a concept promotes greater transfer than repeated retrieval practice with the same example. Participants watched video clips from a lecture about geological science and answered application questions about concepts: either the same question three times or three different questions. Experiments 3 and 4 also included conditions that involved repeatedly studying the information in the application questions (either the same example or three different examples). Two days later, participants took a final test with new application questions. All four experiments showed that variability during retrieval practice produced superior transfer of knowledge to new examples. Experiments 3 and 4 also showed a testing effect and a benefit from studying different examples. Overall, these findings suggest that repeatedly retrieving and applying knowledge to different examples is a powerful method for acquiring knowledge that will transfer to a variety of new contexts. (PsycINFO Database Record

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/xap0000142

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Retrieval practice is most effective when learners engage in effortful and successful retrieval, and when motivational and self-regulatory factors support sustained engagement.

    “For instance, retrieval practice is most effective when learners engage in effortful and successful retrieval, and when motivational and self-regulatory factors support sustained engagement (Butler et al., 2017; Schwerter et al., 2025).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Butler, A. C., Black-Maier, A. C., Raley, N. D., & Marsh, E. J.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
  • Duke University (US)
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied
Published
2017-12
Volume
23
Issue
4
Pages
433-446
ISSN
  • 1076-898X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2192
OpenAlex
W2777231068
Cited by
51
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5
FWCI
2.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Spencer Foundation (201100093)
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
retrieval practice, transfer of learning, application questions, generalization, testing effect, concept learning
MeSH terms
Educational Measurement, Humans, Practice, Psychological, Mental Recall, Transfer, Psychology, Knowledge

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