DOI: 10.5255/ukda-sn-855137
title: Learning from Total Failure: Why Do Impossible Tests Boost Learning? 2017-2021

description: The project concerns the effect of an unsuccessful pre-test (effectively a guess), on the subsequent learning of information, relative to studying that information with no-initial guess. The focus of the work has been the development of a theoretical understanding of when pre-testing is or is not beneficial to subsequent learning, with a view to developing applications of the technique to educational practice. Consequently, each experiment compared the effects of studying versus guessing (and receiving feedback to study) on subsequent memory for the material, with each experiment varying in other aspects (e.g. the nature of the material, or nature of the final test). A total of 26 experimental studies have been completed. Thirteen of these experiments have been published in four outputs and for each of these, the relevant data are published in Open Science Framework (OSF) repositories, as detailed below. A further 6 studies form parts of papers that are either under review, or have been reported at conferences (or both). The remaining studies have not yet been output, but are included in manuscripts in preparation. OSF repositories for the unpublished work will be made available upon acceptance for publication. All data were collected from volunteer participants who were either undergraduates participating for partial course credit, or members of the public who received a small financial payment. Prior to March 2019 all work was completed in person at the University of Plymouth, but thereafter we moved to online testing using Prolific due to the impact of the global pandemic. Output 1 examines the impact of pre-testing on different aspects of the event, tested through different criterion memory tests across 5 experiments. The main conclusion from this output is that pre-testing boosts availability of targets (measured through recognition), but not cue-target associations (measured through recall, or associative recognition). Output 2 tested potential accounts of the pre-testing effect are that either guessing increases a person’s motivation to know the answer (before it arrives), or that the discrepancy between the guess and the actual answer induces surprise which drives learning. We tested these ideas in two experiments, and found that pre-testing increases self-reported motivation to learn a fact before it is revealed, but not surprise in the answer after it is revealed. Output 3 demonstrated that the differential pattern for recall and recognition reported in output 1 also applies to learning of related- and unrelated word pairs, and so challenges previously accepted theories of the pre-testing effect. Output 4 explored whether learning from a pre-test was related to the magnitude of the error made. Across 3 experiments, participants guessed the meaning of foreign-language words that came from one of two semantic categories. Contrary to some popular learning theories, a greater pre-testing effect was found if the initial error was closer to the target answer, rather than further away. Output 5 examines the impact of pre-testing upon memory for incidental details of the presented answer. Across two experiments we showed that while pre-testing reliably boosted memory for what the answer was, it had no impact on memory for what colour the answer was presented in (Experiment 1), or when it was presented (Experiment 2). Output 6 was a conference presentation of subset of two experiments from a larger set of 7 experiments that are in preparation for a paper submission. Collectively these studies sought to explain the discrepancy previously seen between the effects of pre-testing on recognition and recall (Outputs 1 and 3). These experiments demonstrate that pre-testing is reliably observed when tested by recognition, but for the pattern for recall depends upon the degree of similarity between different study items, a factor previously overlooked in the pre-testing literature. Output 7 followed up the findings reported in Output 2, and explored whether the curiosity elicited by pre-testing is specific to the answer being sought, or represents a generalised state such as increased attention or arousal that will boost memory for incidental material. Two experiments demonstrated that the pre-testing effect is highly specific. List of outputs and associated OSF repositories where published are available on the Read-me document.