The memorial consequences of multiple-choice testing

The present article addresses whether multiple-choice tests may change knowledge even as they attempt to measure it. Overall, taking a multiple-choice test boosts performance on later tests, as compared with nontested control conditions. This benefit is not limited to simple definitional questions, but holds true for SAT II questions and for items designed to tap concepts at a higher level in Bloom’s (1956) taxonomy of educational objectives. Students, however, can also learn false facts from multiple-choice tests; testing leads to persistence of some multiple-choice lures on later general knowledge tests. Such persistence appears due to faulty reasoning rather than to an increase in the familiarity of lures. Even though students may learn false facts from multiplechoice tests, the positive effects of testing outweigh this cost.

[1]  Jeffrey D. Karpicke,et al.  The Power of Testing Memory Basic Research and Implications for Educational Practice , 2006 .

[2]  Thomas C. Toppino,et al.  Frequency and the Conference of Referential Validity. , 1977 .

[3]  Elizabeth J Marsh,et al.  The positive and negative consequences of multiple-choice testing. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[4]  Thomas C. Toppino,et al.  Learning from Tests: The Case of True-False Examinations , 1989 .

[5]  Henry L. Roediger,et al.  Generalizing test-enhanced learning from the laboratory to the classroom , 2007, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[6]  Ma Conway,et al.  Handbook of perception and cognition , 1996 .

[7]  Henry L. Roediger,et al.  Chapter 7 – Retrieval Processes , 1996 .

[8]  James A. Kulik,et al.  Effects of Frequent Classroom Testing. , 1991 .

[9]  G. Brosvic,et al.  Immediate Feedback during Academic Testing , 2001, Psychological reports.

[10]  Paul W. Foos,et al.  Using Tests as Learning Opportunities. , 1988 .

[11]  Alan S. Brown,et al.  Information Processing and Cognition: The Loyola Symposium , 1976 .

[12]  Henry L. Roediger,et al.  When additional multiple‐choice lures aid versus hinder later memory , 2006 .

[13]  Benjamin S. Bloom,et al.  Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. , 1957 .

[14]  W. Whitten,et al.  Learning From Tests: Facilitation of Delayed Recall by Initial Recognition Alternatives. , 1980 .

[15]  Barbara A. Spellman,et al.  When Predictions Create Reality: Judgments of Learning May Alter What They Are Intended to Assess , 1992 .

[16]  H. Pashler,et al.  The influence of retrieval on retention , 1992, Memory & cognition.

[17]  Thomas C. Toppino,et al.  Generality of the Negative Suggestion Effect in Objective Tests. , 1993 .

[18]  W. Kintsch,et al.  Differential effects of study and test trials on long-term recognition and recall , 1971 .

[19]  Mark A. McDaniel,et al.  Altering memory representations through retrieval. , 1985 .

[20]  Alan S. Brown,et al.  The negative suggestion effect: Pondering incorrect alternatives may be hazardous to your knowledge. , 1999 .

[21]  Robert A. Bjork,et al.  Memory: Handbook of Perception and Cognition , 1996 .

[22]  John A. Glover,et al.  The "Testing" Phenomenon: Not Gone but Nearly Forgotten , 1989 .

[23]  H. F. Spitzer.  Studies in retention. , 1939 .

[24]  Harry P. Bahrick,et al.  Stabilizing access to marginal and submarginal knowledge , 1997 .

[25]  E. Tulving,et al.  Availability versus accessibility of information in memory for words , 1966 .