Sorry, Am I Intruding? Comparing Performance and Intrusion Rates for Pretested and Posttested Information

Pretesting and posttesting have long been implemented in classrooms as methods of testing and improving learning. Prior research has been mixed on the relative benefits of pretesting versus posttesting, with some studies finding pretesting to be more beneficial, and others finding posttesting to be more beneficial. True/False testing is a particularly easy-to-implement method and is regularly used in classrooms. However, relatively little is known about how these tests affect learning. Three experiments address the effects of true/false pre- and posttests on learning correct information and intrusion rates of false information. We find consistent benefits of both pretesting and posttesting but significantly higher intrusion rates for posttesting relative to pretesting, a finding that persisted despite inclusion of simple True/False feedback (Experiment 2) and substantive feedback (Experiment 3). Although the difference between pretesting and posttesting intrusion rates was still significant with the addition of substantive feedback, overall intrusion rates were greatly reduced.

• Publication year

  2025

• Venue

  Behavioral Science

• Publication date

  2025-08-01

• Fields of study

  Medicine, Education, Psychology

• Identifiers
  DOI 10.3390/bs15081060PMID 40867417PMCID 12383057
• External record

  Open on Semantic Scholar

• Source metadata

  Semantic Scholar, PubMed

• No claims are published for this paper.

• No concepts are published for this paper.

• Supporting comprehension: The advantages of multiple–choice over true—false practice tests

  2025cited by this paper
• Retrieval practice can promote new learning with both related and unrelated prose materials.

  2024cited by this paper
• Examining the effect size and duration of retrieval-induced facilitation

  2022cited by this paper
• True-false tests enhance retention relative to rereading.

  2021cited by this paper
• Pretesting versus posttesting: Comparing the pedagogical benefits of errorful generation and retrieval practice.

  2021cited by this paper
• A little can go a long way: giving learners some context can enhance the benefits of pretesting

  2021cited by this paper
• True-False Testing on Trial: Guilty as Charged or Falsely Accused?

  2020cited by this paper
• Beyond the pretesting effect: What happens to the information that is not pretested?

  2019cited by this paper
• Does pre-testing promote better retention than post-testing?

  2019cited by this paper
• The Effect of Prequestions on Learning from Video Presentations

  2017cited by this paper
• Prequestions do not enhance the benefits of retrieval in a STEM classroom

  2017cited by this paper
• Retrieval-induced remembering and forgetting

  2017cited by this paper
• Multiple-choice pretesting potentiates learning of related information

  2016cited by this paper
• Retrieval practice enhances new learning: the forward effect of testing

  2014cited by this paper
• Optimizing multiple-choice tests as tools for learning

  2014cited by this paper
• Attempting to answer a meaningful question enhances subsequent learning even when feedback is delayed.

  2014cited by this paper
• The effect of testing versus restudy on retention: a meta-analytic review of the testing effect.

  2014cited by this paper
• Selective memory retrieval can impair and improve retrieval of other memories.

  2012cited by this paper
• A progress report on the inhibitory account of retrieval-induced forgetting

  2012cited by this paper
• When and why do retrieval attempts enhance subsequent encoding?

  2012cited by this paper
• Test-Enhanced Learning in a Middle School Science Classroom: The Effects of Quiz Frequency and Placement.

  2011cited by this paper
• Ten benefits of testing and their applications to educational practice.

  2011cited by this paper
• Test-enhanced learning in the classroom: long-term improvements from quizzing.

  2011cited by this paper
• The testing effect, collaborative learning, and retrieval-induced facilitation in a classroom setting

  2009cited by this paper
• The pretesting effect: do unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhance learning?

  2009cited by this paper
• Feedback enhances the positive effects and reduces the negative effects of multiple-choice testing

  2008cited by this paper
• The Critical Importance of Retrieval for Learning

  2008cited by this paper
• Test format and corrective feedback modify the effect of testing on long-term retention

  2007cited by this paper
• The testing effect in recognition memory: a dual process account.

  2007cited by this paper
• Retrieval-induced facilitation: initially nontested material can benefit from prior testing of related material.

  2006cited by this paper
• The positive and negative consequences of multiple-choice testing.

  2005cited by this paper
• When does feedback facilitate learning of words?

  2005cited by this paper
• Accuracy in detecting truths and lies: Documenting the “veracity effect”

  1999cited by this paper
• Remembering can cause forgetting: retrieval dynamics in long-term memory.

  1994cited by this paper
• Generality of the Negative Suggestion Effect in Objective Tests.

  1993cited by this paper
• Becoming Famous Overnight: Limits on the Ability to Avoid Unconscious Influences of the Past

  1989cited by this paper
• Learning from Tests: The Case of True-False Examinations

  1989cited by this paper
• Studies in retention.

  1939cited by this paper
• The Negative Suggestion Effect of the False Statement in the True-False Test

  1934cited by this paper
• PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE The Power of Testing Memory Basic Research and Implications for Educational Practice

  year unknowncited by this paper
• The negative suggestion effect on true-false examination questions.

  year unknowncited by this paper

• No citing papers are available for this paper.