Cited by 563Memory Processes and InfluencesVisual and Cognitive Learning ProcessesStudent Assessment and Feedback

Testing the testing effect in the classroom

McDaniel, Mark A., Anderson, Janis L., Derbish, Mary H., Morrisette, Nova·2007·European Journal of Cognitive Psychology

Abstract

Laboratory studies show that taking a test on studied material promotes subsequent learning and retention of that material on a final test (termed the testing effect). Educational research has virtually ignored testing as a technique to improve classroom learning. We investigated the testing effect in a college course. Students took weekly quizzes followed by multiple choice criterial tests (unit tests and a cumulative final). Weekly quizzes included multiple choice or short answer questions, after which feedback was provided. As an exposure control, in some weeks students were presented target material for additional reading. Quizzing, but not additional reading, improved performance on the criterial tests relative to material not targeted by quizzes. Further, short answer quizzes produced more robust benefits than multiple choice quizzes. This pattern converges with laboratory findings showing that recall tests are more beneficial than recognition tests for subsequent memory performance. We conclude that in the classroom testing can be used to promote learning, not just to evaluate learning.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09541440701326154

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?

  • 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 McDaniel, Anderson, Derbish, & Morisette, 2007

  • Using production tests in the classroom will promote better retention than recognition tests.

    “This study and others indicate that using production tests in the classroom will promote better retention than recognition tests.23,24”

    From Test-enhanced learning in medical education (2008) · cites this paper as [24]

  • At least one study showing the benefits of testing occurred in a university course.

    “However, at least one study showing the benefits of testing occurred in a university course.24”

    From Test-enhanced learning in medical education (2008) · cites this paper as [24]

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 38 · Cited by 563

Authors
McDaniel, M. A., Anderson, J. L., Derbish, M. H., & Morrisette, N.
Affiliations
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • University of New Mexico (US)
Corresponding author
McDaniel, Mark A.
Venue
European Journal of Cognitive Psychology
Published
2007-07
Volume
19
Issue
4-5
Pages
494-513
ISSN
  • 0954-1446 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-0635
OpenAlex
W2159480120
Cited by
563
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 38 · 2018: 37 · 2017: 34 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 43 · 2014: 37 · 2013: 35 · 2012: 28
FWCI
8.85
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
testing effect, classroom quizzes, multiple-choice quizzes, memory retention, recall versus recognition, feedback, university students, learning promotion

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