Abstract
In their recent paper, Chen et al. (Educational Psychology Review, 2021) propose that rest periods between deliberate learning characterize the spacing effect and the alternation between skills without rest characterizes the interleaving effect. In this commentary, we show that this theory is inadequate in two aspects. First, the operationalization of their constructs are problematic—their mechanism of rest-from-deliberate-learning mismatches their operationalization (e.g., they code deliberate learning activities that should not allow for working memory recovery as rest-from-deliberate-learning), and their definition of whether stimuli require discriminative contrast appears to depend on the study outcome. Second, their systematic review neglects a large body of literature that is incompatible with their theory. For example, they neglect classic spacing studies on vocabulary learning, and their theory of spacing effects as being a result of working memory recovery cannot account for lag effects or interactions found in the literature. We conclude that there are almost certainly mechanistic differences between spacing and interleaving effects, but the mechanisms are likely not mutually exclusive, as defined by Chen and colleagues.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Appleton-Knapp, S. L., Bjork, R. A., & Wickens, T. D. (2005). Examining the spacing effect in advertising: Encoding variability, retrieval processes, and their interaction. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(2), 266–276. https://doi.org/10.1086/432236
Bahrick, H. P., Bahrick, L. E., Bahrick, A. S., & Bahrick, P. E. (1993). Maintenance of foreign language vocabulary and the spacing effect. Psychological Science, 4(5), 316–321. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1993.tb00571.x
Birnbaum, M. S., Kornell, N., Bjork, E. L., & Bjork, R. A. (2013). Why interleaving enhances inductive learning: The roles of discrimination and retrieval. Memory & Cognition, 41(3), 392–402. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-012-0272-7
Bjork, R. A., & Allen, T. W. (1970). The spacing effect: Consolidation or differential encoding. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 9(5), 567–572. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(70)80103-7
Brunmair, M., & Richter, T. (2019). Similarity matters: A meta-analysis of interleaved learning and its moderators. Psychological Bulletin, 145(11), 1029–1052. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000209
Bui, D. C., Maddox, G. B., & Balota, D. A. (2013). The roles of working memory and intervening task difficulty in determining the benefits of repetition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20(2), 341–347. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0352-5
Carpenter, S. K. (2017). Spacing effects in learning and memory. In J. T. Wixted & J. H. Byrne (Eds.), Learning and memory: A comprehensive reference (pp. 465–485). Academic Press.
Carpenter, S. K., & Mueller, F. E. (2013). The effects of interleaving versus blocking on foreign language pronunciation learning. Memory & Cognition, 41, 671–682. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-012-0291-4
Carpenter, S. K., Pashler, H., & Cepeda, N. J. (2009). Using tests to enhance 8th grade students’ retention of U.S. history facts. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23(6), 760– 771. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1507
Carvalho, P. F., & Goldstone, R. L. (2017). The sequence of study changes what information is attended to, encoded, and remembered during category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43(11), 1699–1719. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000406
Carvalho, P. F., & Goldstone, R. L. (2019). When does interleaving practice improve learning? In J. Dunlosky & K. A. Rawson (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Cognition and Education (pp. 411–436). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108235631.017
Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 354–380. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.354
Cepeda, N. J., Vul, E., Rohrer, D., Wixted, J. T., & Pashler, H. (2008). Spacing effects in learning: A temporal ridgeline of optimal retention. Psychological Science, 19(11), 1095–1102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02209.x
Chen, O., Paas, F., & Sweller, J. (2021). Spacing and interleaving effects require distinct theoretical bases: A systematic review testing the cognitive load and discriminative-contrast hypotheses. Educational Psychology Review, 33, 1499-1522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09613-w
Cuddy, L. J., & Jacoby, L. L. (1982). When forgetting helps memory: An analysis of repetition effects. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 21(4), 451–467. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(82)90727-7
Ebbinghaus, H. (1885/1964). Memory: A Contribution to Experimental Psychology (trans. H. A. Ruger, C. E. Bussenius, & E. R. Hilgar). New York: Dover Publications.
Foster, N. L., Mueller, M. L., Was, C., Rawson, K. A., & Dunlosky, J. (2019). Why does interleaving improve math learning? The contributions of discriminative contrast and distributed practice. Memory & Cognition, 47(6), 1088–1101. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-019-00918-4
Kang, S. H. K., & Pashler, H. (2012). Learning painting styles: Spacing is advantageous when it promotes discriminative contrast. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26(1), 97–103. psyh. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1801
Kapler, I. V., Weston, T., & Wiseheart, M. (2015). Long-term retention benefits from the spacing effect in a simulated undergraduate classroom using simple and complex curriculum material. Learning and Instruction, 36, 38–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.11.001
Krug, D., Davis, T. B., & Glover, J. A. (1990). Massed versus distributed repeated reading: A case of forgetting helping recall? Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(2), 366–371. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.2.366
Ostrow, K., Heffernan, N., Heffernan, C., & Peterson, Z. (2015). Blocking vs. interleaving: Examining single-session effects within middle school math homework. In Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 338–347). Springer International Publishing.
Peterson, L. R., Saltzman, D., Hillner, K., & Land, V. (1962). Recency and frequency in paired-associate learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(4), 396–403. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043571
Peterson, L. R., Wampler, R., Kirkpatrick, M., & Saltzman, D. (1963). Effect of spacing presentations on retention of a paired associate over short intervals. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66(2), 206–209. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046694
Peterson, L., & Peterson, M. J. (1959). Short-term retention of individual verbal items. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58(3), 193–198. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0049234
Schwartz, M. (1975). The effect of constant vs. varied encoding and massed vs. distributed presentations on recall of paired associates. Memory & Cognition, 3(4), 390–394. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212930
Vlach, H. A., Sandhofer, C. M., & Kornell, N. (2008). The spacing effect in children’s memory and category induction. Cognition, 109(1), 163–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.013
Yan, V. X., & Sana, F. (2021). Does the interleaving effect extend to unrelated concepts? Learners’ beliefs versus empirical evidence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 113(1), 125–137. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000470
Yan, V., Schuetze, B., & Eglington, L. G. (2020). A review of the interleaving effect: Theories and lessons for future research. Preprint. https://psyarxiv.com/ur6g7/
Young, A. P., Healy, A. F., Jones, M., & Bourne, L. E. (2019). Verbal and spatial acquisition as a function of distributed practice and code-specific interference. Memory & Cognition, 47(4), 779–791. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-019-00892
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Declarations
All authors contributed equally to this work and share co-first authorship. Preparation of this manuscript was supported by National Science Foundation grant # BCS-1824257 to PFC and Social Science and Humanities Research Council Insight grant #435-2021-0426 to FS and VXY. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sana, F., Yan, V.X. & Carvalho, P.F. On Rest-from-Deliberate-Learning as a Mechanism for the Spacing Effect: Commentary on Chen et al. (2021). Educ Psychol Rev 34, 1843–1850 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09663-8
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09663-8