The effect of testing on student achievement, 1910–2010
Open accessAbstract
This article summarizes research on the effect of testing on student achievement as found in English-language sources, comprising several hundred studies conducted between 1910 and 2010. Among quantitative studies, mean effect sizes range from a moderate d ≈ 0.55 to a fairly large d ≈ 0.88, depending on the way effects are aggregated or effect sizes are adjusted for study artifacts. Testing with feedback produces the strongest positive effect on achievement. Adding stakes or frequency also strongly and positively affects achievement. Survey studies produce effect sizes above 1.0. Ninety-three percent of qualitative studies analyzed also reported positive effects.
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?
Effect sizes of the testing effect range from moderate to large, with estimates between d = 0.55 and d = 0.88, g = 0.50, and g = 0.61 to g = 0.70.
“Effect sizes range from moderate to large, with estimates between d = 0.55 and d = 0.88 (Phelps, 2012), g = 0.50 (Rowland, 2014), and g = 0.61 to g = 0.70 (Adesope et al., 2017).”
From Testing the testing effect on prolific: when retrieval practice fails to boost learning (2026) · cites this paper as Phelps, 2012
The testing effect tends to be stronger in higher education contexts and when corrective feedback or performance incentives are included.
“The effect tends to be stronger in higher education contexts and when corrective feedback or performance incentives are included (Phelps, 2012; Pan and Rickard, 2018).”
From Testing the testing effect on prolific: when retrieval practice fails to boost learning (2026) · cites this paper as Phelps, 2012
Cites
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Muller, K. E., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Technometrics · doi:10.2307/1270020 · Cited by 99,588 · see citing works
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
Cohen, J. (1990) · Computers Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,406 · see citing works
Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook
(1994) · Journal of Environmental Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0272-4944(05)80231-2 · Cited by 48,420 · see citing works
(2000) · Cited by 9,198 · see citing works
(2008) · Cited by 6,939 · see citing works
Distribution Theory for Glass's Estimator of Effect Size and Related Estimators
Hedges, L. V. (1981) · Journal of Educational Statistics · doi:10.2307/1164588 · Cited by 5,695 · see citing works
Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2015) · doi:10.4135/9781483398105 · Cited by 5,542 · see citing works
McLeod, J. (1999) · SAGE Publications Ltd eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781849209588.n8 · Cited by 3,964 · see citing works
Hunter, J., & Schmidt, F. (2004) · doi:10.4135/9781412985031 · Cited by 3,023 · see citing works
Qualitative methods and analysis in organizational research : a practical guide
Symon, G., & Cassell, C. M. (1998) · SAGE Publications Ltd eBooks · Cited by 823 · see citing works
Using Codes and Code Manuals: A Template Organizing Style of Interpretation
Crabtree, B. F., & Miller, W. L. (1999) · Cited by 514 · see citing works
The generation effect: a meta-analytic review
Bertsch, S., Pesta, B. J., Wiscott, R., & McDaniel, M. A. (2007) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/bf03193441 · Cited by 352 · see citing works
Defending Standardized Testing
Phelps, R. P. (2005) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781410612595 · Cited by 150 · see citing works
Self-citationCorrecting Fallacies About Educational and Psychological Testing
Lilienfeld, S. O., & Thames, A. D. (2009) · Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology · doi:10.1093/arclin/acp051 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Educational achievement testing: Critiques and rebuttals.
Phelps, R. P. (2009) · American Psychological Association eBooks · doi:10.1037/11861-003 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Self-citationThe Rich, Robust Research Literature on Testing's Achievement Benefits
Phelps, R. P. (2005) · doi:10.4324/9781410612595-5 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Self-citationMistaken impressions of large-scale cognitive diagnostic testing.
Leighton, J. P. (2009) · American Psychological Association eBooks · doi:10.1037/11861-007 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Rethinking the Use of Tests: A Meta-Analysis of Practice Testing
Adesope, O. O., Trevisan, D. A., & Sundararajan, N. (2017) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654316689306 · Cited by 544 · see citing works
Testing the testing effect on prolific: when retrieval practice fails to boost learning
Sigayret, K., Parmentier, J.-F., & Silvestre, F. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1727423
“Effect sizes range from moderate to large, with estimates between d = 0.55 and d = 0.88 (Phelps, 2012), g = 0.50 (Rowland, 2014), and g = 0.61 to g = 0.70 (Adesope et al., 2017).”
Influential
- Authors
- Phelps, R. P.
- Affiliations
- a Asheville , North Carolina
- Corresponding author
- Phelps, Richard P.
- ORCID
- Phelps, Richard P.
- Venue
- International Journal of Testing
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2012-01
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 21-43
- ISSN
- 1530-5058 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7574
- OpenAlex
- W2071612687
- Cited by
- 93
- References
- 17
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 34.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- papers.ssrn.com
- Locations
- International Journal of Testing (publishedVersion)
- SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Educational Assessment and Improvement
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Pedagogy
- Keywords
- standardized testing, academic performance, effect size, test frequency, survey studies, educational assessment, history of testing
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
