Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Feb 1;64(2):109-118.
doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2010.11.002.

On the effectiveness of self-paced learning

Jonathan G Tullis  1 , Aaron S Benjamin
Affiliations

On the effectiveness of self-paced learning

Jonathan G Tullis et al. J Mem Lang. .

Abstract

Metacognitive monitoring and control must be accurate and efficient in order to allow self-guided learners to improve their performance. Yet few examples exist in which allowing learners to control learning produces higher levels of performance than restricting learners' control. Here we investigate the consequences of allowing learners to self-pace study of a list of words on later recognition, and show that learners with control of study-time allocation significantly outperformed subjects with no control, even when the total study time was equated between groups (Experiments 1 and 2). The self-pacing group also outperformed a group for which study time was automatically allocated as a function of normative item difficulty (Experiment 2). The advantage of self-pacing was apparent only in subjects who utilized a discrepancy reduction strategy-that is, who allocated more study time to normatively difficult items. Self-pacing can improve memory performance, but only when appropriate allocation strategies are used.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Left panel: Item discriminability as a function of condition based on a subject analysis. Right panels: Discriminability for discrepancy reducers (top) and discrepancy increasers (bottom).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Left panel: Item discriminability as a function of condition based on an item analysis. Right panels: Discriminability for items as calculated by discrepancy reducers (top) and discrepancy increasers (bottom).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Item discriminability as computed from self-paced subjects plotted against item discriminability as computed from control (fixed-rate) subjects.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Baker L, Anderson RI. Effects of inconsistent information on text processing: Evidence for comprehension monitoring. Reading Research Quarterly. 1982;17:281–294.
    1. Belmont JM, Butterfield EC. Learning strategies as determinants of memory deficiencies. Cognitive Psychology. 1971;2:411–420.
    1. Benjamin AS. Predicting and postdicting the effects of word frequency on memory. Memory & Cognition. 2003;31:297–305. - PubMed
    1. Benjamin AS. Response speeding mediates the contribution of cue familiarity and target retrievability to metamnemonic judgments. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 2005;12:874–879. - PubMed
    1. Benjamin AS. Memory is more than just remembering: Strategic control of encoding, accessing memory, and making decisions. In: Benjamin AS, Ross BH, editors. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation: Skill and Strategy in Memory Use. Vol. 48. Academic Press; London: 2008. pp. 175–223.

LinkOut - more resources