Beyond the pretesting effect: What happens to the information that is not pretested?
Abstract
Taking a test before learning can enhance the long-term retention of the information that was tested, a phenomenon known as the pretesting effect. In the present research, we explored the consequences of pretesting on memory not only for the pretested information but also for nonpretested information. Across 5 experiments and various manipulations (the number of pretest questions, the relationship between pretested questions and nonpretested questions, whether participants expected nonpretested information to be tested, and the format of the to-be-learned material), a clear pattern of results emerged. Specifically, despite robust benefits of pretesting being observed for the learning of pretested information, in none of the 5 experiments did we find any evidence of pretesting affecting participants' ability to remember the information that was not itself pretested. This finding suggests that the benefits of pretesting may be relatively limited and may not necessarily extend beyond the enhanced learning of the specific information being pretested. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
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?
The current study's implementation has high ecological validity because online videos are common in contemporary education, and high fidelity to laboratory protocols where benefits of prequestions have been observed using short videos.
“This implementation has high ecological validity, as online videos are common in contemporary education, and high fi delity to laboratory protocols, where bene fi ts of prequestions have been observed using short videos (e.g., Carpenter & Toftness, 2017; James & Storm, 2019).”
From ManyClasses 2: The effects of prequestions on media interactions and learning. (2026) · cites this paper as James & Storm, 2019
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Learning from errors: Students' and instructors' practices, attitudes, and beliefs
Pan, S. C., Sana, F., Samani, J., Cooke, J., & Kim, J. A. (2020) · Memory · doi:10.1080/09658211.2020.1815790 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
Pan, S. C., & Carpenter, S. K. (2023) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-023-09814-5 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
ManyClasses 2: The effects of prequestions on media interactions and learning.
Motz, B. A., Chinni, A., de Leeuw, J. R., Jankowski, H. E., Aggarwal, A., Amato, M., Berlin, K., Britten, K., Brown, A., Cerchiaro, M. L., et al. (2026) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/edu0000978 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
The Effect of Prequestions on Learning: A Multilevel Meta-Analysis
King-Shepard, Q. W., Walker, J., Nokes-Malach, T. J., Carpenter, S. K., & Fraundorf, S. H. (2025) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-025-10075-7 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
- Authors
- James, K. K., & Storm, B. C.
- ORCID
- Storm, Benjamin C.
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied
- Published
- 2019-12
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 576-587
- ISSN
- 1076-898X (ISSN-L)
- 1939-2192
- OpenAlex
- W2993873154
- Cited by
- 28
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5
- FWCI
- 1.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
- 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 › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Keywords
- pretesting effect, long-term retention, retrieval practice
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Educational Measurement, Female, Humans, Learning, Male, Memory, Mental Recall, Young Adult
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