Is Retrieval Practice Always Superior to Restudy?
A classic study by Roediger and Karpicke (2006a) investigated the relative benefits of restudy versus retrieval practice, or “test”, on memory retention. Repeated studying was superior to repeated testing when memory was tested immediately (all study > multiple study/single test > single study/multiple tests). Strikingly, the pattern reversed when memory was tested after a days-long delay, with best performance in a single study/multiple tests condition. As each study period was minutes-long and contained repeated reading of a to-be-remembered text passage, we were interested whether the striking benefit for repeated testing at the expense of any restudy replicates when study opportunities are brief, akin to a single mention of a fact in a lecture. Participants encountered academically relevant facts a total of three times, each time either studied (S) or self-tested (T). Final test followed immediately or after a delay (Experiment 1: two days, Experiment 2: seven days). Partially replicating prior work, immediate memory benefited from repeated study (SSS > SST > STT), but the pattern did not reverse after a delay. Instead, memory was superior for facts the were restudied in addition to self-tested (SST > STT = SSS). We further investigated whether restudy after a test (STS) provides additional benefits compared to restudy before test (SST), but found comparably high delayed recall in both conditions. The results show that under some circumstances, balancing repetition and testing can allow for more information to be learned and retained long-term.