A comparison of covert and overt retrieval practice over multiple spaced sessions

Abstract

Retrieval practice can be covert or overt, with only the latter requiring spoken or written responses, and both enhance long-term retention in single study-test designs. However, the benefits of covert retrieval over multiple testing cycles, like those seen in successive relearning, have not been investigated. Participant cooperation with covert retrieval requests may lessen on later cycles, particularly if learners are metacognitively unaware of the benefits of repeated retrieval. In this preregistered study, we investigate whether covert retrieval can be encouraged on all testing cycles by inducing uncertainty about the need to produce a response by varying the proportion of overt trials and whether covert retrieval trials were blocked or interleaved during retrieval practice. We also consider participants’ assessment of the accuracy of their own retrieval attempts and changes over the learning schedule in important individual differences measures of anxiety, mastery, intrinsic motivation, and attentional control. The data shed light on not only the best method of encouraging active retrieval, but also the affective and metacognitive changes that occur over a multi-session spaced retrieval practice schedule