Retrieval Practice versus Mnemonic Generation

Abstract

Retrieval practice has generally been shown to be an effective study strategy. The benefits of retrieval practice, however, have largely been compared to restudying, a passive and ineffective study strategy. Here, I investigated the memory and metamemory effects of practicing retrieval versus generating mnemonics, an active and effective study strategy. In 4 experiments across both lab and classroom settings, practicing retrieval was compared with generating mnemonics in boosting memory, application of knowledge, metacognitive monitoring, and metacognitive control. Participants practiced retrieval of, generated mnemonics for, or restudied chemistry concepts. Participants rated how well they remembered the concepts after using the study strategies and ultimately took cued recall tests. Practicing retrieval and generating mnemonics produced better memory than restudying but did not yield different memory from each other. Creating mnemonics, however, took twice as long as practicing retrieval. Practicing retrieval supported transfer more effectively than generating mnemonics in the classroom experiment. Learners’ JOLs increased when generating mnemonics but decreased when practicing retrieval. Consequently, retrieval practice yielded the most accurate calibration. Also, learners did not execute successful metacognitive control. Their choice of retrieval practice bolstered their learning better when the choice was honored than not honored. However, their choice of creating mnemonics did not result in better learning performance in the honoring condition than in the dishonoring condition. Retrieval practice was also compared with using mnemonics to boost memory, transfer of knowledge, and calibration. The mnemonics were created by Chemistry and memory experts. Using mnemonics did not differ from practicing retrieval in boosting memory, but did yield less accurate judgments of memory. Using mnemonics did not bolster memory, knowledge application, and accurate judgments of memory more than restudy. The results hint that using the mnemonics generated by others was by no means an effective study strategy. Across the laboratory and classroom experiments, learners rated retrieval practice as the least effective strategy overall. In general, retrieval practice proved to be an effective and efficient study strategy, even for complex concepts; yet, learners failed to recognize its mnemonic and metamnemonic benefits.