Abstract

It has often been shown that tests as intentionally hindered and difficult learning tasks increase long-term learning compared to easier tasks. Previous work additionally indicated that higher intelligence might serve as a prerequisite for such beneficial effects of tests. Nevertheless, despite their long-term learning effects, tests were also found to be evaluated as more negative and to lead to more stress and anxiety compared to easier control tasks. Stress and anxiety, in turn, often yield detrimental effects on learning outcomes. Hence, we hypothesized that tests increase later learning outcomes but simultaneously also lead to more stress perceptions. Such increased stress was, in turn, hypothesized to reduce later learning outcomes (thus, stress might serve as a mediator of the beneficial effects of tests on learning). All these assumed effects should further be moderated by intelligence, insofar as that higher intelligence should increase beneficial effects of tests on learning, should decrease stress perceptions caused by tests, and should reduce detrimental effects of stress on learning outcomes. Higher intelligence was also assumed to be generally associated with higher learning. We conducted a laboratory study (N=89) to test these hypotheses: Participants underwent an intelligence screening, then worked on either a test or a re-reading control task, and reported their immediate stress perceptions. Later learning outcomes were assessed after 1week. The results supported all assumed main effects but none of the assumed interactions. Thus, participants using tests had higher long-term learning outcomes compared to participants using re-reading tasks. However, participants using tests also perceived more immediate stress compared to participants that only re-read the materials. These stress perceptions in turn diminished the beneficial effects of tests. Stress was also generally related to lower learning, whereas higher intelligence was linked to higher learning and also to lower stress. Hence, our findings again support the often assumed benefits of tests—even when simultaneously considering learners’ intelligence and and when considering the by tests caused stress perceptions. Notably, controlling for stress further increases these long-term learning benefits. We then discuss some limitations and boundaries of our work as well as ideas for future studies.

Highlights

  • The following work raises the question if normally beneficial learning tests serve as double-edged swords, if they can result in both beneficial as well as detrimental effects: the present work was conducted to simultaneously focus on the often observed positive long-term learning effects of tests as difficult and demanding learning strategies and on potential negative effects caused by such learning tests, namely, increased stress or anxiety perceptions

  • Because recent studies indicated that higher intelligence is valuable for the effectiveness of tests, the present work investigates if higher intelligence moderates the benefits of tests, serving as a prerequisite or boundary condition

  • Such increased stress perceptions served as a suppressor of the beneficial effects of tests on later learning outcomes: The direct effect of the learning condition controlling for stress perceptions was stronger than the total effect of the learning condition without controlling for differences in stress perceptions

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The following work raises the question if normally beneficial learning tests serve as double-edged swords, if they can result in both beneficial as well as detrimental effects: the present work was conducted to simultaneously focus on the often observed positive long-term learning effects of tests as difficult and demanding learning strategies (see, e.g., Adesope et al, 2017; Yang et al, 2021) and on potential negative (side) effects caused by such learning tests, namely, increased stress or anxiety perceptions (see, e.g., Hinze and Rapp, 2014; Wenzel and Reinhard, 2021). Testing these different research issues seems necessary for being able to give empirically well-grounded advice regarding the application of tests in university or school settings to learners and lecturers alike—especially because we investigate learning outcomes and students’ experiences and perceptions as well as individual differences as potential prerequisites

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call