Does testing enhance new learning because it insulates against proactive interference?

Guessing as a learning intervention: A meta-analytic review of the prequestion effect

Giving students test questions before they have learned the correct answers (i.e., prequestions) enhances learning. However, existing research has provided conflicting evidence on whether the benefits of prequestions are specific to the initially tested material or if they generalize to new, nontested material. In this review, we summarize the literature on the prequestion effect, describe the attention-based account underlying this effect, report a meta-analysis of the magnitude of the specific and general effects, and explore theoretically and empirically relevant moderator variables that influence the size and direction of the prequestion effect. This preregistered meta-analysis demonstrated a moderate specific effect (g = 0.54, k = 97) but a virtually nonexistent general effect (g = 0.04, k = 91). Overall, the attention-based account received support from some theoretically relevant moderator analyses. Future researchers are encouraged to conduct theoretically motivated studies to help clarify the mechanisms that underlie the attention-enhancing effects of prequestions and to explore the benefits of prequestions in educational domains to establish the extent to which these effects translate into the classroom.

Buildup and release from proactive interference: The forward testing effect in children's spatial memory

Previous work has indicated that testing can enhance memory for subsequently studied new information by reducing proactive interference from previously studied information. Here, we examined this forward testing effect in children's spatial memory. Kindergartners (5-6 years) and younger (7-8 years) and older (9-10 years) elementary school children studied four successively presented 3 × 3 arrays, each composed of the same 9 objects. The children were asked to memorize the locations of the objects that differed across the four arrays. Following presentation of each of the first three arrays, memory for the object locations of the respective array was tested (testing condition) or the array was re-presented for additional study (restudy condition). Results revealed that testing Arrays 1 to 3 enhanced children's object location memory for Array 4 relative to restudying. Moreover, children in the testing condition were less likely to confuse Array 4 locations with previous locations, suggesting that testing reduces the buildup of proactive interference. Both effects were found regardless of age. Thus, the current findings indicate that testing is an effective means to resolve proactive interference and, in this way, to enhance children's learning and remembering of spatial information even before the time of school entry.