A comparison of adaptive and fixed schedules of practice.

Understanding and optimizing spacing during learning is a central topic for research in learning and memory and has substantial implications for real-world learning. Spacing memory retrievals across time improves memory relative to massed practice-the well-known spacing effect. Most spacing research has utilized fixed (predetermined) spacing intervals. Some findings indicate advantages of expanding over equal spacing (e.g., Landauer & Bjork, 1978); however, evidence is mixed (e.g., Karpicke & Roediger, 2007), and the field has lacked an integrated explanation. Learning may instead depend on interactions of spacing with an underlying variable of learning strength that varies for learners and items, and it may be better optimized by adaptive adjustments of spacing to learners' ongoing performance. Two studies investigated an adaptive spacing algorithm, Adaptive Response-Time-based Sequencing or ARTS (Mettler, Massey & Kellman, 2011) that uses response-time and accuracy to generate spacing. Experiment 1 compared adaptive scheduling with fixed schedules having either expanding or equal spacing. Experiment 2 compared adaptive schedules to 2 fixed "yoked" schedules that were copied from adaptive participants, equating average spacing across conditions. In both experiments, adaptive scheduling outperformed fixed conditions at immediate and delayed tests of retention. No evidence was found for differences between expanding and equal spacing. Yoked conditions showed that learning gains were due to adaptation to individual items and learners. Adaptive spacing based on ongoing assessments of learning strength yields greater learning gains than fixed schedules, a finding that helps to understand the spacing effect theoretically and has direct applications for enhancing learning in many domains. (PsycINFO Database Record

[1]  L. S. Tsai.  The relation of retention to the distribution of relearning. , 1927 .

[2]  Paul Pimsleur.  A MEMORY SCHEDULE , 1967 .

[3]  Robert A. Bjork,et al.  The spacing effect: Consolidation or differential encoding? , 1970 .

[4]  R. Atkinson.  Optimizing the Learning of a Second-Language Vocabulary. , 1972 .

[5]  Douglas L. Hintzman,et al.  Theoretical implications of the spacing effect. , 1974 .

[6]  A. Glenberg.  Monotonic and nonmonotonic lag effects in paired-associate and recognition memory paradigms , 1976 .

[7]  P. R. D’Agostino,et al.  Effects of repetition as a function of study-phase retrieval , 1976 .

[8]  William A. Johnston,et al.  The contributions of encoding effort and variability to the spacing effect on free recall. , 1976 .

[9]  Robert A. Bjork,et al.  Optimum rehearsal patterns and name learning , 1978 .

[10]  A. Glenberg,et al.  Component-levels theory of the effects of spacing of repetitions on recall and recognition , 1979, Memory & cognition.

[11]  Vito Modigliani,et al.  The effect of expanded versus massed practice on the retention of multiplication facts and spelling lists. , 1985 .

[12]  F. N. Dempster,et al.  Spacing effects and their implications for theory and practice , 1989 .

[13]  Robert A. Bjork,et al.  A new theory of disuse and an old theory of stimulus fluctuation , 1992 .

[14]  E. Gorzelańczyk,et al.  Optimization of repetition spacing in the practice of learning. , 1994, Acta neurobiologiae experimentalis.

[15]  William L. Cull,et al.  Expanding understanding of the expanding-pattern-of-retrieval mnemonic: Toward confidence in applicability , 1996 .

[16]  Robert A. Bjork,et al.  Assessing our own competence: Heuristics and illusions. , 1999 .

[17]  William L. Cull,et al.  Untangling the benefits of multiple study opportunities and repeated testing for cued recall , 2000 .

[18]  Harold Pashler,et al.  Is temporal spacing of tests helpful even when it inflates error rates? , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[19]  Jeroen G. W. Raaijmakers,et al.  Spacing and repetition effects in human memory: application of the SAM model , 2003, Cogn. Sci..

[20]  Vicki E. Snider.  A Comparison of Spiral versus Strand Curriculum. , 2004 .

[21]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Practice and Forgetting Effects on Vocabulary Memory: An Activation-Based Model of the Spacing Effect , 2005, Cogn. Sci..

[22]  Shana K. Carpenter,et al.  Application of the Testing and Spacing Effects to Name Learning , 2005 .

[23]  H. Pashler,et al.  Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. , 2006, Psychological bulletin.

[24]  Kelli M Taylor,et al.  The effects of overlearning and distributed practise on the retention of mathematics knowledge , 2006 .

[25]  Shana K. Carpenter,et al.  Enhancing learning and retarding forgetting: Choices and consequences , 2007, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[26]  Jeffrey D. Karpicke,et al.  Expanding retrieval practice promotes short-term retention, but equally spaced retrieval enhances long-term retention. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[27]  Edward Vul,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article Spacing Effects in Learning A Temporal Ridgeline of Optimal Retention , 2022 .

[28]  John R Anderson,et al.  Using a model to compute the optimal schedule of practice. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[29]  M. D’Esposito.  Working memory. , 2008, Handbook of clinical neurology.

[30]  R. Bjork,et al.  Learning Concepts and Categories , 2008, Psychological science.

[31]  Katherine A. Rawson,et al.  Testing the retrieval effort hypothesis: Does greater difficulty correctly recalling information lead to higher levels of memory? , 2009 .

[32]  Robert V. Lindsey,et al.  Optimizing Memory Retention with Cognitive Models , 2009 .

[33]  P. Kellman,et al.  Perceptual learning and human expertise. , 2009, Physics of life reviews.

[34]  Ed Vul,et al.  Predicting the Optimal Spacing of Study: A Multiscale Context Model of Memory , 2009, NIPS.

[35]  Aaron S. Benjamin,et al.  What makes distributed practice effective? , 2010, Cognitive Psychology.

[36]  Henry L. Roediger,et al.  Is expanding retrieval a superior method for learning text materials? , 2010, Memory & cognition.

[37]  Robert A. Bjork,et al.  Optimizing retrieval as a learning event: When and why expanding retrieval practice enhances long-term retention , 2010, Memory & cognition.

[38]  Peter P. J. L. Verkoeijen,et al.  Spacing and Testing Effects: A Deeply Critical, Lengthy, and At Times Discursive Review of the Literature , 2010 .

[39]  Jeffrey D. Karpicke,et al.  Spaced retrieval: absolute spacing enhances learning regardless of relative spacing. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[40]  Christopher N. Wahlheim,et al.  Spacing enhances the learning of natural concepts: an investigation of mechanisms, metacognition, and aging , 2011, Memory & cognition.

[41]  E. Bjork,et al.  Making things hard on yourself, but in a good way: Creating desirable difficulties to enhance learning. , 2011 .

[42]  Philip J. Kellman,et al.  Improving Adaptive Learning Technology through the Use of Response Times , 2011, CogSci.

[43]  John Dunlosky,et al.  Optimizing schedules of retrieval practice for durable and efficient learning: how much is enough? , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[44]  Paul Smolen,et al.  Computational Design of Enhanced Learning Protocols , 2011, Nature Neuroscience.

[45]  Shana K. Carpenter,et al.  Using Spacing to Enhance Diverse Forms of Learning: Review of Recent Research and Implications for Instruction , 2012 .

[46]  John W. Graham,et al.  Analysis of Missing Data , 2012 .

[47]  Hermann Ebbinghaus (1885).  Memory: A Contribution to Experimental Psychology , 2013, Annals of Neurosciences.

[48]  R. Bjork,et al.  Self-regulated learning: beliefs, techniques, and illusions. , 2013, Annual review of psychology.

[49]  Everett Mettler.  Studies of Adaptive and Fixed Schedules in Factual and Perceptual Learning , 2013 .

[50]  Philip J. Kellman,et al.  Applying perceptual and adaptive learning techniques for teaching introductory histopathology , 2013, Journal of pathology informatics.

[51]  Michael C. Mozer,et al.  Maximizing Students' Retention Via Spaced Review: Practical Guidance From Computational Models Of Memory , 2013, CogSci.

[52]  Robert V. Lindsey,et al.  Improving Students’ Long-Term Knowledge Retention Through Personalized Review , 2014, Psychological science.

[53]  R. Bjork,et al.  Retrieval Fluency as a Metacognitive Index , 2014 .

[54]  Philip J. Kellman,et al.  Adaptive response-time-based category sequencing in perceptual learning , 2014, Vision Research.

[55]  Philip J. Kellman,et al.  Adaptive Perceptual Learning in Electrocardiography: The Synergy of Passive and Active Classification , 2015, CogSci.

[56]  P. Kellman,et al.  Training pattern recognition of skin lesion morphology, configuration, and distribution. , 2015, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.