Cited by 36Memory Processes and InfluencesMemory and Neural MechanismsCognitive Functions and Memory

Investigating and explaining the effects of successive relearning on long-term retention.

Rawson, Katherine A., Vaughn, Kalif E., Walsh, Matthew, Dunlosky, John·2018·Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

Abstract

Research on techniques for enhancing long-term retention has focused almost exclusively on single-session learning conditions. However, even the most potent initial learning manipulations typically do not yield retention levels sufficient for successful performance in many real-world contexts. In contrast, successive relearning (i.e., practicing to some level of mastery in multiple learning sessions) is a promising technique for enhancing long-term retention, but surprisingly few studies have been conducted to date. In two experiments, the advantage of successive relearning over single-session learning (i.e., relearning potency ) was substantial, ds = 1.52 to 4.19. Additionally, the effects of initial lag on retention were sizable prior to relearning (ds = 1.07 to 1.87) but attenuated after relearning (ds = -.20 to .38; the extent to which relearning attenuates the effects of initial learning conditions is referred to as relearning override ). To evaluate a possible explanation of these effects, we formally tested the relearning attenuates decay (RAD) model. The RAD model accurately accounted for relearning potency and relearning override effects (and several other secondary effects). We discuss the practical and theoretical implications of these findings and advocate that successive relearning is an important next frontier for educationally relevant memory research. (PsycINFO Database Record

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/xap0000146

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?

  • If the same information was successively relearned three times with mastery over spaced intervals, recall after one week increased to 80%.

    “However, if the same information was successively relearned three times (with mastery) over spaced intervals, recall after one week increased to 80% (Cohen's d for the difference = 4.19).”

    From The benefits of successive relearning on multiple learning outcomes. (2022) · cites this paper as Rawson et al. (2018)

  • Participants recalled 20% of learned information one week after a single learning session.

    “For example, Rawson, Vaughn, Walsh, & Dunlosky (2018) found that participants recalled 20% of learned information one week after a single learning session.”

    From The benefits of successive relearning on multiple learning outcomes. (2022) · cites this paper as Rawson, Vaughn, Walsh, & Dunlosky (2018)

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 28 · Cited by 36

Authors
Rawson, K. A., Vaughn, K. E., Walsh, M., & Dunlosky, J.
Affiliations
  • Kent State University (US)
  • Northern Kentucky University (US)
  • RAND Corporation (US)
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied
Published
2018-03
Volume
24
Issue
1
Pages
57-71
ISSN
  • 1076-898X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2192
OpenAlex
W2793780381
Cited by
36
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3
FWCI
1.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
James S. McDonnell Foundation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
long-term retention, memory retention
MeSH terms
Educational Measurement, Humans, Learning, Memory, Models, Psychological, Practice, Psychological, Mental Recall, Retention, Psychology, Students, Time Factors

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