A review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness and efficiency of incremental rehearsal.

IF 1.8
Shawna Petersen-Brown, Kourtney R Kromminga, Emily K Fischer, Elizabeth Kinsey Hawley
{"title":"A review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness and efficiency of incremental rehearsal.","authors":"Shawna Petersen-Brown, Kourtney R Kromminga, Emily K Fischer, Elizabeth Kinsey Hawley","doi":"10.1037/spq0000702","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Incremental rehearsal (IR) is a drill intervention that supports acquisition and fluency in basic academic skills according to prior research and a meta-analysis. The objectives of this updated and expanded systematic review and meta-analysis were to investigate the effectiveness and efficiency of IR, implementation and methodological characteristics, and whether IR can be considered an evidence-based practice. Thirty-six single case design and 24 group design studies were included, with 1,305 participants total. Within the meta-analysis, random effects models were used to estimate the effects of IR. IR resulted in large effects overall in group design and combined (group and single case design) analyses. For the group design analysis, <i>g</i> = 0.856, 95% CI [-0.14, 1.85], <i>p</i> = .09, τ² = 3.71. For the combined analysis, ES = 2.453, 95% CI [0.47, 4.44], <i>p</i> = .02, τ² = 10.5. IR was determined to be a practice with mixed evidence based on the findings of 10 methodologically sound studies. Additionally, IR was found to be less efficient in delayed retention than other drill interventions and similarly efficient to IR modifications. Moderator analyses did not identify statistically significant moderators of IR's effects, although these analyses were likely impacted by variability in effect sizes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":74763,"journal":{"name":"School psychology (Washington, D.C.)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"School psychology (Washington, D.C.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000702","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Incremental rehearsal (IR) is a drill intervention that supports acquisition and fluency in basic academic skills according to prior research and a meta-analysis. The objectives of this updated and expanded systematic review and meta-analysis were to investigate the effectiveness and efficiency of IR, implementation and methodological characteristics, and whether IR can be considered an evidence-based practice. Thirty-six single case design and 24 group design studies were included, with 1,305 participants total. Within the meta-analysis, random effects models were used to estimate the effects of IR. IR resulted in large effects overall in group design and combined (group and single case design) analyses. For the group design analysis, g = 0.856, 95% CI [-0.14, 1.85], p = .09, τ² = 3.71. For the combined analysis, ES = 2.453, 95% CI [0.47, 4.44], p = .02, τ² = 10.5. IR was determined to be a practice with mixed evidence based on the findings of 10 methodologically sound studies. Additionally, IR was found to be less efficient in delayed retention than other drill interventions and similarly efficient to IR modifications. Moderator analyses did not identify statistically significant moderators of IR's effects, although these analyses were likely impacted by variability in effect sizes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

增量预演的有效性与效率综述与元分析。
增量排练(IR)是一种训练干预,根据先前的研究和荟萃分析,支持基本学术技能的习得和流畅性。这项更新和扩展的系统评价和荟萃分析的目的是调查IR的有效性和效率、实施和方法特征,以及IR是否可以被视为循证实践。包括36个单例设计研究和24个组设计研究,共有1305名参与者。在meta分析中,使用随机效应模型来估计IR的影响。在组设计和联合(组和单例设计)分析中,IR总体上产生了很大的影响。组设计分析,g = 0.856, 95% CI [-0.14, 1.85], p = 0.09, τ²= 3.71。综合分析,ES = 2.453, 95% CI [0.47, 4.44], p = 0.02, τ²= 10.5。根据10项方法学上合理的研究结果,确定IR是一种混合证据的做法。此外,与其他钻井干预措施相比,IR在延迟滞留方面的效率较低,但与IR改良措施的效率相似。调节因子分析没有发现IR效应的统计显著调节因子,尽管这些分析可能受到效应大小变异性的影响。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信