Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The effects of recognition and recall study tasks with feedback in a computer-based vocabulary lesson

  • Research
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Should computer-based study tasks use multiple-choice or constructed-response question format? It was hypothesized that a constructucted-response study task (CR) with feedback would be superior to multiple-choice study tasks that allowed either single or multiple tries (STF and MTF). Two additional recognition study task treatments were included that required an overt constructed response after feedback (STF+OR and MTF+OR) in order to control for possible confounding caused by response form mismatch between the recognition study task and recall posttest. Graduate students (N=133) were randomly assigned to one of the five computer-delivered treatments. Relative to STF, posttest effect sizes were: STF <MTF (0.12)<CC (0.62). As hypothesized, CR scores were larger than MTF and STF scores, although the difference was not significant. An overt response had a much stronger effect than expected. The theoretical and practical implications of these results are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, R.C., Kulhavy, R.W., & Andre, T. (1971). Feedback procedures in programmed instruction.Journal of Eductional Psychology, 62, 148–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allan, K., & Rugg, M.D. (1997). An event-related potential study of explicit memory on tests of wordstem cued recall and recognition memory.Neuropsychologia, 35, 387–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bangert-Drowns, R.L., Kulik, C.C., Kulik, J.A., & Morgan, M. (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events.Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 213–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, J.C. (1977). Effects of immediate testing on delayed retrieval: Search and recovery operations with four types of cue.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 3, 719–732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. (1976). An analysis of recognition and recall and of problems in their comparisons. In J. Brown (Ed.),Recall and recognition, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J., & Packham, D.W. (1967). Effect of prior recall on multiple-response recognition.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 19, 356–361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clariana, R.B. (1993). A review of multiple-try feedback in traditional and computer-based instruction.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 20, 67–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clariana, R.B. (1999, February). CBT design: A feedback ATI.Twentieth Annual Proceedings of Selected Research Presentations of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, 20, in press.

  • Clariana, R.B., Wagner, D., & Rohrer-Murphy, L.C. (2000). Applying a connectionist description of feedback timing.Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 69–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, A.J.R., & Monk, A. (1976). Learning for recall and learning for recognition. In J. Brown (Ed.),Recall and recognition. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crocker, L.M., & Algina, J. (1986).Introduction to classical and modern test theory, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuddy, L.J., & Jacoby, L.L. (1982). When forgetting helps memory: An analysis of repetition effects.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21, 451–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, R., Sutherland, N.S., & Judd, B.R. (1961). Information content in recognition and recall.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 422–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996).The systematic design of instruction, 4th ed. New York: HarpeCollins Publishers Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dick, W., & Latta, R. (1970). Comparative effects of ability and presentation mode in computer-assisted instruction and programmed instruction.Audio-Visual Communication Review, 18(3), 34–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobbins, I.G., Kroll, N.E.A., Yonelinas, A.P., & Liu, Q. (2000). Distinctiveness in recognition and free recall: The role of recollection in the rejection of the familiar.Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 381–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elman, J.L. (1993). Learning and development in neural networks: The importance of staring small.Cognition, 48, 71–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glover, J.A. (1989). The “testing” phenomenon: Not gone but nearly forgotten.Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 392–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godden, D.R., & Baddeley, A.D. (1975). Contextdependent memory in two natural environments: On land and underwater.British Journal of Psychology, 66, 325–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godden, D.R., & Baddeley, A.D. (1980). When does context influence recognition memory?British Journal of Psychology, 71, 99–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, L.L. (1978). On interpreting the effects of repetition: Solving a problem versus remembering a solution.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 649–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D.H., & Tessmer, M. (1996). An outcomebased taxonomy for instructional systems design, evaluation and research.Training Research Journal, 2, 11–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolers, P.A. (1973). Remembering operations.Memory and Cognition, 1, 347–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinez, M.E., & Katz, I.R. (1996). Cognitive processing requirements of constructed figural response and multiple-choice items in architecture assessment.Educational Assessment, 3, 83–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, M.A., Mason, M.E.J. (1985). Altering memory representations through retrieval.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 371–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neely, J.H., & Balota, D.A. (1981). Test-expectancy and semantic-organization effects in recall and recognition.Memory and Cognition, 9, 283–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Neil, H.F. (1970).Effects of state anxiety and programming variables on the computer-assisted learning of colleges students. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED053574)

  • Plunkett, K., & Marchman, V.A. (1993). From rote learning to system building: Acquiring verb morphology in children and connectionist nets.Cognition, 48, 21–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plunkett, K., & Marchman, V.A. (1996). Learning from a connectionist model of the acquisition of the English past tense.Cognition, 61, 299–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards, D.R. (1989). A comparison of three computer-generated feedback strategies.Eleventh Annual Proceedings of Selected Research Presentations of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, 11, 358–367.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotello, C.M., & Heit, E. (1999). Two-process models of recognition memory: Evidence for recall-to-reject.Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 432–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rugg, M.D., Fletcher, P.C., Allan, K., Frith, C.D., Frackowiak, R.S.J., & Dolan, R.J. (1998). Neural correlates of memory retrieval during recognition memory and cued recall.Neuroimage, 8, 262–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Runquist, W.N. (1986). The effect of testing on the forgetting of related and unrelated associates.Canadian Journal of Psychology, 40, 65–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russo, R., Ward, G., Geurts, H., & Scheres, A. (1999). When unfamiliarity matters: Changing environmental context between study and test affects recognition memory for unfamiliar stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 488–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seidenberg, M., & McClelland, J. (1989). A distributed model of word recognition and naming.Psychological Review, 96, 523–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Titus, A.A., & Carrier, C. (1980).The effects of pretraining and test mode expectations on note taking. Paper presented at the 64th Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA, April 7–11, 1980. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED193336)

  • Tobias, S. (1973). Review of the response mode issue.Review of Educational Research, 43, 193–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tulving, E. (1976). Ecphoric processes in recall and recognition. In J. Brown (Ed.),Recall and recognition. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Underwood, B.J. (1972). Are we overloading memory? In A.W. Melton & E. Martin (Eds.),Coding processes in human memory, Washington DC: Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J.P. (1963). Comparisons of several response modes in a review program.Journal of Educational Psychology, 54, 253–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J.P. (1965). Effectiveness of constructed-response and multiple-choice programming modes as a function of test mode.Journal of Educational Psychology, 56, 111–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J.P. (1966). Combining response modes in programmed instruction.Journal of Educational Psychology, 57, 215–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Pennsylvania State University Great Valley School of Graduate Professional Studies, Pennsylvania, USA

    Roy B. Clariana & Doris Lee

Authors
  1. Roy B. Clariana
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Doris Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This investigation was funded by a competitive grant, SRS-99-03, from the CEO of the Great Valley School of Graduate Professional Studies, The Pennsylvania State University.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Clariana, R.B., Lee, D. The effects of recognition and recall study tasks with feedback in a computer-based vocabulary lesson. ETR&D 49, 23–36 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504913

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504913

Keywords

Search

Navigation