Collaborative review enhances note-taking, especially after a longer delay, but does not boost test performance.

IF 2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Yunfeng Wei, Michelle L Meade, Nicholas C Soderstrom
{"title":"Collaborative review enhances note-taking, especially after a longer delay, but does not boost test performance.","authors":"Yunfeng Wei, Michelle L Meade, Nicholas C Soderstrom","doi":"10.1080/09658211.2025.2573272","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The present study replicated and extended prior research by comparing the effects of reviewing notes in groups vs. reviewing notes individually on individual final test performance. We also examined the potential interaction between reviewing delay and reviewing methods. Finally, students completed a questionnaire, the results of which reveal how students perceive the effectiveness of group vs. individual reviewing methods. In this experiment, students watched and took notes on two lectures. Following a short or long delay, students reviewed their notes either individually or in a group and were allowed to update their notes during these sessions. After the reviewing phase, students completed a final test for each lecture. We found that individuals added more idea units to their notes after reviewing notes in a group, and this beneficial effect was greater after a longer delay compared to a shorter delay. However, more new idea units did not translate into better cued recall performance. Our findings suggest that reviewing notes in a group helps individuals add more overlooked idea units in their notes, but more factors should be considered when studying the relationship between reviewing notes in a group and final test performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":18569,"journal":{"name":"Memory","volume":" ","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Memory","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2025.2573272","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The present study replicated and extended prior research by comparing the effects of reviewing notes in groups vs. reviewing notes individually on individual final test performance. We also examined the potential interaction between reviewing delay and reviewing methods. Finally, students completed a questionnaire, the results of which reveal how students perceive the effectiveness of group vs. individual reviewing methods. In this experiment, students watched and took notes on two lectures. Following a short or long delay, students reviewed their notes either individually or in a group and were allowed to update their notes during these sessions. After the reviewing phase, students completed a final test for each lecture. We found that individuals added more idea units to their notes after reviewing notes in a group, and this beneficial effect was greater after a longer delay compared to a shorter delay. However, more new idea units did not translate into better cued recall performance. Our findings suggest that reviewing notes in a group helps individuals add more overlooked idea units in their notes, but more factors should be considered when studying the relationship between reviewing notes in a group and final test performance.

协作复习提高了记笔记的能力,尤其是在较长时间的延迟之后,但并不能提高考试成绩。
本研究通过比较小组复习笔记与单独复习笔记对个人期末考试成绩的影响,复制并扩展了先前的研究。我们还研究了复习延迟和复习方法之间潜在的相互作用。最后,学生们完成了一份调查问卷,调查结果揭示了学生如何看待小组与个人复习方法的有效性。在这个实验中,学生们观看并做了两堂课的笔记。在短时间或长时间的延迟之后,学生们可以单独或小组复习笔记,并允许在这些课程中更新笔记。在复习阶段之后,学生们完成了每堂课的期末测试。我们发现,在集体复习笔记后,个人在笔记中添加了更多的想法单元,而且这种有益的效果在较长时间的延迟后比在较短时间的延迟后更明显。然而,更多的新想法单元并没有转化为更好的线索回忆表现。我们的研究结果表明,小组复习笔记有助于个人在笔记中添加更多被忽视的概念单元,但在研究小组复习笔记与最终考试成绩之间的关系时,应该考虑更多因素。
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
Memory
Memory PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
79
期刊介绍: Memory publishes high quality papers in all areas of memory research. This includes experimental studies of memory (including laboratory-based research, everyday memory studies, and applied memory research), developmental, educational, neuropsychological, clinical and social research on memory. By representing all significant areas of memory research, the journal cuts across the traditional distinctions of psychological research. Memory therefore provides a unique venue for memory researchers to communicate their findings and ideas both to peers within their own research tradition in the study of memory, and also to the wider range of research communities with direct interest in human memory.
×
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