Editing Testing effect (section)

=== Test difficulty ===
{{Main|desirable difficulty}}
According to the ''retrieval effort hypothesis'', "difficult but successful retrievals are better for memory than easier successful retrievals" which supports the idea of finding a [[desirable difficulty]] within the retrieval practice considering our [[List of memory biases|memory biases]].<ref name=":7" /> Learning a language was better when using unfamiliar words compared to familiar words, supporting higher difficulty resulting in greater learning.<ref name=":13">{{Cite journal|last=Battig|first=William F.|date=1961|title=Review of Meaningfulness and Verbal Learning|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/1419690|journal=The American Journal of Psychology|volume=74|issue=4|pages=656–657|doi=10.2307/1419690|jstor=1419690|issn=0002-9556|url-access=subscription}}</ref> The difficulty relates to the likelihood of forgetting<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Glover|first=John A.|date=1989|title=The "testing" phenomenon: Not gone but nearly forgotten.|url=http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.392|journal=Journal of Educational Psychology|language=en|volume=81|issue=3|pages=392–399|doi=10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.392|issn=0022-0663|url-access=subscription}}</ref> as the harder it is to remember, the more likely you are to remember and retain the information<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Pyc|first1=Mary A.|last2=Rawson|first2=Katherine A.|date=May 2009|title=Testing the retrieval effort hypothesis: Does greater difficulty correctly recalling information lead to higher levels of memory?|url=http://www2.kent.edu/CAS/Psychology/resources/cml/upload/Pyc-Rawson-2009-JML-pdf.pdf|journal=Journal of Memory and Language|volume=60|issue=4|pages=437–447|doi=10.1016/j.jml.2009.01.004|s2cid=73651886|access-date=2015-05-15|archive-date=2015-05-18|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150518093434/http://www2.kent.edu/CAS/Psychology/resources/cml/upload/Pyc-Rawson-2009-JML-pdf.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref> supporting the notion that more effort is required for longer lasting retention<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Gardiner|first1=F. M.|last2=Craik|first2=F. I.|last3=Bleasdale|first3=F. A.|date=1973|title=Retrieval difficulty and subsequent recall|journal=Memory & Cognition|volume=1|issue=3|pages=213–216|doi=10.3758/BF03198098|issn=0090-502X|pmid=24214547|s2cid=38135672|doi-access=free}}</ref> similar to the depth of processing at encoding.<ref name=":32">{{Cite journal|last1=Craik|first1=Fergus I. M.|last2=Tulving|first2=Endel|date=1975|title=Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory.|url=http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.268|journal=Journal of Experimental Psychology: General|language=en|volume=104|issue=3|pages=268–294|doi=10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.268|s2cid=7896617 |issn=1939-2222|url-access=subscription}}</ref> Therefore, lack of effort from students studying could be a factor that reduces its efficiency.<ref name=":12"/>

Increased difficulty shows decreased initial performance but increased performance on harder tests in the future, so retention and transfer suffer less when training is difficult.<ref name=":82"/> Even unsuccessful retrieval can enhance learning,<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Kornell|first1=Nate|last2=Hays|first2=Matthew Jensen|last3=Bjork|first3=Robert A.|date=2009|title=Unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhance subsequent learning|url=https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19586265/|journal=Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition|volume=35|issue=4|pages=989–998|doi=10.1037/a0015729|issn=0278-7393|pmid=19586265}}</ref> as creating the thought helps with retention<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Slamucka|first1=Norman J.|last2=Fevreiski|first2=Jacobo|date=1983-04-01|title=The generation effect when generation fails|url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022537183901123|journal=Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior|language=en|volume=22|issue=2|pages=153–163|doi=10.1016/S0022-5371(83)90112-3|issn=0022-5371|url-access=subscription}}</ref> due to the [[generation effect]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Rosner|first1=Zachary A.|last2=Elman|first2=Jeremy A.|last3=Shimamura|first3=Arthur P.|date=2013|title=The generation effect: activating broad neural circuits during memory encoding|journal=Cortex; A Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior|volume=49|issue=7|pages=1901–1909|doi=10.1016/j.cortex.2012.09.009|issn=1973-8102|pmc=3556209|pmid=23079490}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Izawa|first=Chizuko|date=1970|title=Optimal potentiating effects and forgetting-prevention effects of tests in paired-associate learning.|url=http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/h0028541|journal=Journal of Experimental Psychology|language=en|volume=83|issue=2, Pt.1|pages=340–344|doi=10.1037/h0028541|issn=0022-1015|url-access=subscription}}</ref> Like with processing time, it is the qualitative nature of the information that determines retention.<ref name=":32" />

Getting feedback helps with learning<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Rowland|first=Christopher A.|date=2014|title=The effect of testing versus restudy on retention: a meta-analytic review of the testing effect|url=https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25150680/|journal=Psychological Bulletin|volume=140|issue=6|pages=1432–1463|doi=10.1037/a0037559|issn=1939-1455|pmid=25150680|s2cid=30042631 }}</ref> but finding a [[desirable difficulty]] for the test combined with feedback<ref name=":3">{{Cite journal|last1=Kubik|first1=Veit|last2=Gaschler|first2=Robert|last3=Hausman|first3=Hannah|date=March 2021|title=PLAT 20(1) 2021: Enhancing Student Learning in Research and Educational Practice: The Power of Retrieval Practice and Feedback|journal=Psychology Learning & Teaching|language=en|volume=20|issue=1|pages=1–20|doi=10.1177/1475725720976462|s2cid=232170985 |issn=1475-7257|doi-access=}}</ref> is more beneficial than studying or testing without feedback.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Agarwal|display-authors=etal|year=2007|title=Examining the Testing Effect with Open- and Closed-Book Tests|journal=Applied Cognitive Psychology|volume=22|issue=7|pages=861–876|citeseerx=10.1.1.545.4826|doi=10.1002/acp.1391}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Larsen|first1=Douglas P.|last2=Butler|first2=Andrew C.|last3=Roediger|first3=Henry L.|date=2009|title=Repeated testing improves long-term retention relative to repeated study: a randomised controlled trial|url=https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19930508/|journal=Medical Education|volume=43|issue=12|pages=1174–1181|doi=10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03518.x|issn=1365-2923|pmid=19930508|s2cid=2446794}}</ref> The ''Read, Recite, Review'' method<ref>{{Cite book|last=Nilson|first=Linda B.|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=8mFfDAAAQBAJ&dq=Teaching+at+Its+Best%3A+A+Research-Based+Resource+for+College+Instructors&pg=PP15|title=Teaching at Its Best: A Research-Based Resource for College Instructors|date=2016-07-18|publisher=John Wiley & Sons|isbn=978-1-119-09632-0|language=en}}</ref> has been proposed as a method to combine retrieval practice with feedback.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=McDaniel|first1=Mark A.|last2=Howard|first2=Daniel C.|last3=Einstein|first3=Gilles O.|date=2009|title=The read-recite-review study strategy: effective and portable|url=https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19320858/|journal=Psychological Science|volume=20|issue=4|pages=516–522|doi=10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02325.x|issn=1467-9280|pmid=19320858|s2cid=8841135}}</ref>