Literature DB >> 18491500

Feedback enhances the positive effects and reduces the negative effects of multiple-choice testing.

Andrew C Butler1, Henry L Roediger.   

Abstract

Multiple-choice tests are used frequently in higher education without much consideration of the impact this form of assessment has on learning. Multiple-choice testing enhances retention of the material tested (the testing effect); however, unlike other tests, multiple-choice can also be detrimental because it exposes students to misinformation in the form of lures. The selection of lures can lead students to acquire false knowledge (Roediger & Marsh, 2005). The present research investigated whether feedback could be used to boost the positive effects and reduce the negative effects of multiple-choice testing. Subjects studied passages and then received a multiple-choice test with immediate feedback, delayed feedback, or no feedback. In comparison with the no-feedback condition, both immediate and delayed feedback increased the proportion of correct responses and reduced the proportion of intrusions (i.e., lure responses from the initial multiple-choice test) on a delayed cued recall test. Educators should provide feedback when using multiple-choice tests.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18491500     DOI: 10.3758/mc.36.3.604

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  18 in total

1.  The influence of retrieval on retention.

Authors:  M Carrier; H Pashler
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1992-11

2.  Delay-improved retention of a difficult task.

Authors:  Y BRACKBILL; A BRAVOS; R H STARR
Journal:  J Comp Physiol Psychol       Date:  1962-12

3.  Effects of delay of information feedback and task complexity on the identification of concepts.

Authors:  L E BOURNE
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1957-09

4.  The positive and negative consequences of multiple-choice testing.

Authors:  Henry L Roediger; Elizabeth J Marsh
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 3.051

5.  Test-enhanced learning: taking memory tests improves long-term retention.

Authors:  Henry L Roediger; Jeffrey D Karpicke
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2006-03

6.  Correcting a metacognitive error: feedback increases retention of low-confidence correct responses.

Authors:  Andrew C Butler; Jeffrey D Karpicke; Henry L Roediger
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 3.051

Review 7.  Monitoring and control processes in the strategic regulation of memory accuracy.

Authors:  A Koriat; M Goldsmith
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 8.934

8.  Errors committed with high confidence are hypercorrected.

Authors:  B Butterfield; J Metcalfe
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 3.051

9.  Memory in naturalistic and laboratory contexts: distinguishing the accuracy-oriented and quantity-oriented approaches to memory assessment.

Authors:  A Koriat; M Goldsmith
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1994-09

10.  Recall criterion does not affect recall level or hypermnesia: a puzzle for generate/recognize theories.

Authors:  H L Roediger; D G Payne
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1985-01
View more
  49 in total

1.  Scaffolding feedback to maximize long-term error correction.

Authors:  Bridgid Finn; Janet Metcalfe
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2010-10

2.  Does test-enhanced learning transfer for triple associates?

Authors:  Steven C Pan; Carol M Wong; Zachary E Potter; Jonathan Mejia; Timothy C Rickard
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2016-01

3.  The Future of Medical Education: Assessing the Impact of Interventions on Long-Term Retention and Clinical Care.

Authors:  Andrew C Butler; Nathaniel D Raley
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2015-09

4.  Does response mode affect amount recalled or the magnitude of the testing effect?

Authors:  Adam L Putnam; Henry L Roediger
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2013-01

5.  Delayed versus immediate feedback in children's and adults' vocabulary learning.

Authors:  Janet Metcalfe; Nate Kornell; Bridgid Finn
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2009-12

6.  Delaying feedback by three seconds benefits retention of face-name pairs: the role of active anticipatory processing.

Authors:  Shana K Carpenter; Edward Vul
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2011-10

7.  Does the benefit of testing depend on lag, and if so, why? Evaluating the elaborative retrieval hypothesis.

Authors:  Katherine A Rawson; Kalif E Vaughn; Shana K Carpenter
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2015-05

8.  Retrieval practice and spacing effects in multi-session treatment of naming impairment in aphasia.

Authors:  Erica L Middleton; Katherine A Rawson; Jay Verkuilen
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2019-07-16       Impact factor: 4.027

9.  The hypercorrection effect in younger and older adults.

Authors:  Teal S Eich; Yaakov Stern; Janet Metcalfe
Journal:  Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn       Date:  2012-12-14

10.  Correcting false memories: Errors must be noticed and replaced.

Authors:  Hillary G Mullet; Elizabeth J Marsh
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2016-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.