Cited by 513Memory Processes and InfluencesVisual and Cognitive Learning ProcessesStudent Assessment and Feedback

Test format and corrective feedback modify the effect of testing on long-term retention

Kang, Sean H. K., McDermott, Kathleen B., Roediger, Henry L.·2007·European Journal of Cognitive Psychology

Abstract

We investigated the effects of format of an initial test and whether or not students received corrective feedback on that test on a final test of retention 3 days later. In Experiment 1, subjects studied four short journal papers. Immediately after reading each paper, they received either a multiple choice (MC) test, a short answer (SA) test, a list of statements to read, or a filler task. The MC test, SA test, and list of statements tapped identical facts from the studied material. No feedback was provided during the initial tests. On a final test 3 days later (consisting of MC and SA questions), having had an intervening MC test led to better performance than an intervening SA test, but the intervening MC condition did not differ significantly from the read statements condition. To better equate exposure to test-relevant information, corrective feedback during the initial tests was introduced in Experiment 2. With feedback provided, having had an intervening SA test led to the best performance on the final test, suggesting that the more demanding the retrieval processes engendered by the intervening test, the greater the benefit to final retention. The practical application of these findings is that regular SA quizzes with feedback may be more effective in enhancing student learning than repeated presentation of target facts or taking an MC quiz.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09541440601056620

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • When material has been previously studied, taking an MCQ test followed by feedback yields comparable final test performance to restudying.

    “When material has been previously studied, taking an MCQ test followed by feedback has been found to yield comparable final test performance to restudying (e.g.Butler & Roediger, 2007; S. H. K. Kang, McDermott, & Roediger, 2007;McDaniel, Anderson, Derbish, & Morisette, 2007).”

    From The benefit of generating errors during learning (2014) · cites this paper as S. H. K. Kang, McDermott, & Roediger, 2007

  • There is evidence that such a narrow study-test matching is an unlikely explanation of the testing superiority.

    “There is evidence, however, that such a narrow study-test matching is an unlikely explanation of the testing superiority.”

    From Neural Correlates of Long-Term Memory Enhancement Following Retrieval Practice (2021) · cites this paper as Kang et al., 2007

  • Studies examining this question showed that the testing effect was maintained when the test format was changed between training and final test (e.g., from free recall to recognition), or from short-answer questions to multiple-choice questions.

    “Studies examining this question showed that the testing effect was maintained when the test format was changed between training and final test (e.g., from free recall to recognition; Carpenter and DeLosh, 2006), or from short-answer questions to multiple-choice questions (Kang et al., 2007; for a review, Pan and Rickard, 2018).”

    From Neural Correlates of Long-Term Memory Enhancement Following Retrieval Practice (2021) · cites this paper as Kang et al., 2007

  • When correct-answer feedback occurs at the time of the initial test, there is some evidence that short-answer tests are better than multiple-choice tests, regardless of whether the final test is in the same short-answer format or is a multiple-choice test.

    “When correct-answer feedback occurs at the time of the initial test, there is some evidence that short-answer tests are better, regardless of whether the final test is in the same short-answer format or is a multiple-choice test (Kang et al. 2007).”

    From Practicing Retrieval Facilitates Learning (2021) · cites this paper as Kang et al. 2007

  • Providing correct answer feedback can be essential to learning from tests, especially when performance on an initial test is very low.

    “Indeed, providing students with correct answer feedback can be essential to their learning from tests, especially when performance on an initial test is very low.29”

    From Test-enhanced learning in medical education (2008) · cites this paper as [29]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kang, S. H. K., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger, H. L.
Affiliations
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • Washington University in St Louis
Corresponding author
Kang, Sean H. K.
Venue
European Journal of Cognitive Psychology
Published
2007-07
Volume
19
Issue
4-5
Pages
528-558
ISSN
  • 0954-1446 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-0635
OpenAlex
W1981846272
Cited by
513
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 43 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 35 · 2014: 45 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 27
FWCI
8.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The European Journal of Cognitive 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 › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
Keywords
retrieval practice, long-term retention, test format, corrective feedback, multiple-choice tests, short-answer tests, student learning

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