Timeline for Compared efficiency of different spaced-repetition memorisation techniques
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 1, 2015 at 2:44 | comment | added | Nicolas Raoul | +1 Could you please identify which part of the second paper (Toppino) is a comparizon of different spacing techniques (like Leitner, SM2, etc)? Thanks! | |
| Aug 9, 2012 at 2:56 | history | edited | Artem Kaznatcheev | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 174 characters in body
|
| Jun 9, 2012 at 19:59 | comment | added | William B Swift | From the abstract of the first paper: >> However, there was no evidence that a particular relative spacing schedule (expanding, equal, or contracting) was inherently superior to another. Although expanding schedules afforded a pattern of increasing retrieval difficulty across repeated tests, this did not translate into gains in long-term retention. Repeated spaced retrieval had powerful effects on retention, but the relative schedule of repeated tests had no discernible impact. | |
| Jun 8, 2012 at 14:44 | history | answered | eykanal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |