The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Improving Students’ Long-Term Knowledge Retention Through Personalized Review
Abstract
Human memory is imperfect; thus, periodic review is required for the long-term preservation of knowledge and skills. However, students at every educational level are challenged by an ever-growing amount of material to review and an ongoing imperative to master new material. We developed a method for efficient, systematic, personalized review that combines statistical techniques for inferring individual differences with a psychological theory of memory. The method was integrated into a semester-long middle-school foreign-language course via retrieval-practice software. Using a cumulative exam administered after the semester’s end, we compared time-matched review strategies and found that personalized review yielded a 16.5% boost in course retention over current educational practice (massed study) and a 10.0% improvement over a one-size-fits-all strategy for spaced study.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100612453266 · Cited by 3,138
Test-Enhanced Learning: Taking Memory Tests Improves Long-Term Retention
Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x · Cited by 2,867
Knowledge tracing: Modeling the acquisition of procedural knowledge
Corbett, A. T., & Anderson, J. R. (1995) · User Modelling and User-Adapted Interaction · doi:10.1007/bf01099821 · Cited by 2,324
Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis.
Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.354 · Cited by 1,888
Self-citationMemory and Metamemory Considerations in the Training of Human Beings
Bjork, R. A. (1994) · Metacognition · doi:10.7551/mitpress/4561.003.0011 · Cited by 1,084
Spacing Effects in Learning: A Temporal Ridgeline of Optimal Retention
Cepeda, N. J., Vul, E., Rohrer, D., Wixted, J. T., & Pashler, H. (2008) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02209.x · Cited by 631
Self-citationNelson, T. O., & Dunlosky, J. (1991) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1991.tb00147.x · Cited by 580
“Learning factors analysis-a general method for cognitive model evaluation and improvement,”
Cen, H., Koedinger, K., & Junker, B. (2006) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/11774303_17 · Cited by 572
Using tests to enhance 8th grade students' retention of U.S. history facts
Carpenter, S. K., Pashler, H., & Cepeda, N. J. (2009) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.1507 · Cited by 254
Self-citationDistributed and massed practice from laboratory to classroom
Seabrook, R., Brown, G. D. A., & Solity, J. E. (2005) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.1066 · Cited by 211
Research works printed but not linked: 21
- 10.1037/h0033475 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/978-3-540-69132-7_111 · DOI
- Chi M., Koedinger K., Gordon G., Jordan P., VanLehn K. (2011). Instructional factors analysis: A cognitive model for multiple instructional interventions. In Pechenizkiy M., Calders T., Conati C., Ventura S., Romero C., Stamper J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Educational Data Mining (pp. 61–70). Retrieved from http://educationaldatamining.org/EDM2011/proceedings-2
- 10.1037/a0032425 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10459-008-9101-y · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03889.x · DOI
- 10.1007/978-1-4757-3990-9 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.04.023 · DOI · Paper page
- Khajah M., 2013, Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 758
- Leitner S., 1972, So lernt man lernen
- 10.1037/h0087426 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/acp.1454 · DOI
- Mozer M., Pashler H., Cepeda N., Lindsey R., Vul E. (2009). Predicting the optimal spacing of study: A multiscale context model of memory. In Bengio Y., Schuurmans D., Lafferty J., Williams C., Culotta A. (Eds.), Advances in neural information processing systems 22. Retrieved from http://books.nips.cc/nips22.html · DOI
- 10.1207/s15516709cog0000_14 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/1076-898X.14.2.101 · DOI · Paper page
- Pavlik P., 2009, Proceeding of the Fourteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, 531
- Rasch G., 1961, Proceedings of the Fourth Berkeley Symposium on Math, Statistics, and Probability, 321
- VanLehn K., Jordan P., Litman D. (2007). Developing pedagogically effective tutorial dialogue tactics: Experiments and a testbed. In Proceedings of the SLaTE Workshop on Speech and Language Technology in Education (pp. 17–20). Retrieved from http://www.isca-speech.org/archive/slate_2007 · DOI
- van Rijn D. H., van Maanen L., van Woudenberg M. (2009). Passing the test: Improving learning gains by balancing spacing and testing effects. In Howes A., Peebles D., Cooper R. P. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Cognitive Modeling. Retrieved from http://sideshow.psyc.bbk.ac.uk/rcooper/iccm2009/proceedings/
- 10.1016/j.jmp.2006.01.004 · DOI
- Wozniak P., 1994, Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis, 54, 59, 10.55782/ane-1994-1003 · DOI
Cited by
Context-Aware Attentive Knowledge Tracing
Ghosh, A., Heffernan, N., & Lan, A. S. (2020) · Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining · doi:10.1145/3394486.3403282 · Cited by 580
Spaced Repetition Promotes Efficient and Effective Learning: Policy Implications for Instruction
Kang, S. H. K. (2016) · Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1177/2372732215624708 · Cited by 408
Retrieval-Based Learning: A Decade of Progress
Karpicke, J. D. (2017) · Learning and Memory: A Comprehensive Reference · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-809324-5.21055-9 · Cited by 223
Li, Y., & Bates, T. C. (2019) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/xge0000669 · Cited by 215
AI-assisted knowledge assessment techniques for adaptive learning environments
Minn, S. (2022) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100050 · Cited by 166
Metadata
- Authors
- Lindsey, R. V., Shroyer, J. D., Pashler, H., & Mozer, M. C.
- Venue
- Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2014-01-20
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 639-647
- ISSN
- 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9280
- OpenAlex
- W2097731551
- Cited by
- 216
- References
- 12
- FWCI
- 6.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Improving Students’ Long-Term Knowledge Retention Through Personalized Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0956797613504302
- The paper
- Lindsey, R. V., Shroyer, J. D., Pashler, H., & Mozer, M. C. (2014). Improving Students’ Long-Term Knowledge Retention Through Personalized Review. Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613504302
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
