References

Summaries and download links will be added soon.

• Agarwal, P.K., Karpicke, J.D., Kang, S.H.K., Roediger, H.L. and McDermott, K.B. (2012) ‘Examining the testing effect with open- and closed-book tests’, Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22(7), pp. 861–876.
• Vol 1: Chapter 7
This study investigates the testing effect—the well-established finding that actively retrieving information (through testing) improves long-term learning more than simply re-studying material.

Key findings:

• Testing enhances long-term retention:
  Both open-book and closed-book tests significantly improved later recall compared to repeated studying.
• Open-book vs. closed-book differences:
• Open-book tests led to better immediate performance (because students could consult materials).
• However, this advantage disappeared over time—on delayed tests, both formats produced similar retention.
• Feedback is crucial:
  The learning benefits were strongest when tests were followed by corrective feedback.
• Students misjudge learning strategies:
  Participants believed that re-studying would be more effective, even though testing actually led to better long-term learning.

Main conclusion:

The study demonstrates that retrieval practice (testing) is a powerful learning tool regardless of test format. While open-book tests feel easier and improve short-term performance, both open- and closed-book testing are equally effective for durable learning—challenging the assumption that only closed-book exams promote retention.

Read the full article here >>

Baddeley, A.D. (1992) ‘Working memory’, Science, 255(5044), pp. 556–559.

• Vol 1: Chapters 2, 4

Baddeley, A.D. and Hitch, G.J. (1974) ‘Working memory’, in Bower, G.H. (ed.) The Psychology of Learning and Motivation. New York: Academic Press, pp. 47–89.

• Vol 1: Chapter 4

Barnett, S.M. and Ceci, S.J. (2002) ‘When and where do we apply what we learn? A taxonomy for far transfer’, Psychological Bulletin, 128(4), pp. 612–637.

• Vol 1: Appendix B

Bjork, R.A. and Bjork, E.L. (2011) ‘Making things hard on yourself, but in a good way: Creating desirable difficulties to enhance learning’, in Gernsbacher, M.A., Pew, R.W., Hough, L.M. and Pomerantz, J.R. (eds.) Psychology and the Real World: Essays Illustrating Fundamental Contributions to Society. New York: Worth Publishers, pp. 56–64.

• Vol 1: Chapters 1, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, App B

Bruner, J.S. (1960) The Process of Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

• Vol 1: Chapter 11

Cepeda, N.J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J.T. and Rohrer, D. (2006) ‘Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis’, Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), pp. 354–380.

• Vol 1: Chapters 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, App B

Cepeda, N.J., Vul, E., Rohrer, D., Wixted, J.T. and Pashler, H. (2008) ‘Spacing effects in learning: A temporal ridgeline of optimal retention’, Psychological Science, 19(11), pp. 1095–1102.

• Vol 1: Chapter 8

Chi, M.T.H., De Leeuw, N., Chiu, M.H. and LaVancher, C. (1994) ‘Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding’, Cognitive Science, 18(3), pp. 439–477.

• Vol 1: Chapters 9, 12, App B

Chi, M.T.H., Feltovich, P.J. and Glaser, R. (1981) ‘Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices’, Cognitive Science, 5(2), pp. 121–152.

• Vol 1: Chapters 6, 11

Chi, M.T.H., Glaser, R. and Rees, E. (1982) Expertise in Problem Solving. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

• Vol 1: Chapters 2, 4, 5, 6, App B

Cowan, N. (2001) ‘The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(1), pp. 87–114.

• Vol 1: Chapters 2, 4, App B

Craik, F.I.M. and Lockhart, R.S. (1972) ‘Levels of processing: A framework for memory research’, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), pp. 671–684.

• Vol 1: Chapter 9

Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M.E. and Gardner, M. (2017) Effective Teacher Professional Development. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute.

• Vol 1: Chapter 13

Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K.A., Marsh, E.J., Nathan, M.J. and Willingham, D.T. (2013) ‘Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology’, Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), pp. 4–58.

• Vol 1: Chapters 1, 3, 7, 9

Ebbinghaus, H. (1885/1913) Memory: A Contribution to Experimental Psychology. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.

• Vol 1: Chapters 1, 5, 8

Ericsson, K.A. and Kintsch, W. (1995) ‘Long-term working memory’, Psychological Review, 102(2), pp. 211–245.

• Vol 1: Chapter 6

Ericsson, K.A., Krampe, R.T. and Tesch-Römer, C. (1993) ‘The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance’, Psychological Review, 100(3), pp. 363–406.

• Vol 1: Chapter 6

Flavell, J.H. (1979) ‘Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry’, American Psychologist, 34(10), pp. 906–911.

• Vol 1: Appendix B

Hattie, J. and Timperley, H. (2007) ‘The power of feedback’, Review of Educational Research, 77(1), pp. 81–112.

• Vol 1: Chapters 2, 10, 12

Karpicke, J.D. and Blunt, J.R. (2011) ‘Retrieval practice produces more learning than elaborative studying with concept mapping’, Science, 331(6018), pp. 772–775.

• Vol 1: Chapter 7

Koriat, A. and Bjork, R.A. (2005) ‘Illusions of competence in monitoring one’s knowledge during study’, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(2), pp. 187–194.

• Vol 1: Chapters 1, 3

Miller, G.A. (1956) ‘The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information’, Psychological Review, 63(2), pp. 81–97.

• Vol 1: Chapter 4

Paivio, A. (1991) ‘Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status’, Canadian Journal of Psychology, 45(3), pp. 255–287.

• Vol 1: Chapter 9, App B

Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D. and Bjork, R. (2008) ‘Learning styles: Concepts and evidence’, Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), pp. 105–119.

• Vol 1: Chapter 3

Pressley, M., McDaniel, M.A., Turnure, J.E., Wood, E. and Ahmad, M. (1987) ‘Generation and precision of elaboration: Effects on intentional and incidental learning’, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13(2), pp. 291–300.

• Vol 1: Chapter 9, App B
• Roediger, H. L., & Butler, A. C. (2011). The critical role of retrieval practice in long-term retention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(1), 20–27.
• Vol 1: Chapters 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, App B

Roediger and Butler (2011) examine how retrieval practice—especially in the form of testing—promotes long-term memory, based on research evidence. The article compiles experimental research showing that simply reading material is not as effective as actively retrieving it from memory. Testing functions not only as a method of assessment but also as a tool for enhancing learning (the so-called testing effect).

Key findings:

• Testing helps retain information longer than simply rereading.
• Repeated retrieval practice strengthens memory traces and reduces forgetting.
• Retrieval practice is most effective when combined with a delay (delayed testing), which reinforces memory better than immediate testing.
• Learning improves even when retrieval attempts fail—the process of trying to recall is beneficial in itself.

The article emphasizes that tests should be seen as tools for learning, not just for assessment. This has significant pedagogical applications, especially in classroom instruction and self-directed learning.

Read the article abstract >

Download another article about the topic > (Roediger HL, Butler AC, Pascual-Leone A, et al. Paradoxes of learning and memory. In: Kapur N, ed. The Paradoxical Brain. Cambridge University Press; 2011:151-176.)

• Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). Test-enhanced learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17(3), 249–255.
• Vol 1: Chapters 1, 5, 7, App B

Roediger and Karpicke (2006), in their article “Test-enhanced learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term retention”, investigated how taking memory tests affects the durability of learning. They found that simply rereading does not enhance learning as effectively as taking tests, even when no feedback is provided after the test.

Study design:

• In the experiment, students read a text and then either:
  • reread the text (rereading group),
  • or took a free recall test (testing group).
• Learning was measured either after 5 minutes, 2 days, or 1 week.

Results:

• In the short term (5 minutes), the rereading group performed slightly better.
• In the long term (2 days and 1 week), the testing group remembered significantly more information.

Conclusion:

• Taking tests improves long-term memory, even without providing feedback.
• This phenomenon is known as the “testing effect.”

Significance:

• The findings challenge the traditional view of tests as mere assessment tools and highlight their active role in the learning process.

Read the article abstract >

Read another article about the subject > (Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). The Power of Testing Memory: Basic Research and Implications for Educational Practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(3), 181-210.)

Rohrer, D. and Taylor, K. (2007) ‘The shuffling of mathematics problems improves learning’, Instructional Science, 35(6), pp. 481–498.

• Vol 1: Chapters 8, 12, App B

Soderstrom, N.C. and Bjork, R.A. (2015) ‘Learning versus performance: An integrative review’, Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(2), pp. 176–199.

• Vol 1: Chapters 1, 2, 3, 10

Squire, L.R. (2004) ‘Memory systems of the brain: A brief history and current perspective’, Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 82(3), pp. 171–177.

• Vol 1: Chapter 5, App B

Sweller, J. (1988) ‘Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning’, Cognitive Science, 12(2), pp. 257–285.

• Vol 1: Chapters 3, 4, 10, 12, App B

Sweller, J., Ayres, P. and Kalyuga, S. (2011) Cognitive Load Theory. New York: Springer.

• Vol 1: Chapters 4, 10, 12, App B

Willingham, D.T. (2009) Why Don’t Students Like School? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

• Vol 1: Chapters 2, 5, App B