1

INFLUENCE OF ASSESSMENT LABELS ON TESTING EFFECT

The Influence of Assessment Labels on the Testing Effect

Francesca E. Bowser

Department of Psychology, University of Pittsburgh

2
INFLUENCE OF ASSESSMENT LABELS ON TESTING EFFECT

Abstract
3
INFLUENCE OF ASSESSMENT LABELS ON TESTING EFFECT

The Influence of Assessment Labels on the Testing Effect

The testing effect is the phenomenon that long-term retention of studied information is

improved by test-taking. A variety of studies on this subject have demonstrated that compared to

simply reading or passively studying, being tested on material encourages enhanced retrieval of

that information (Richland, et al., 2009; Roediger and Karpicke, 2006). Similarly, the self-

explanation effect posits that self-generated explanations of studied material also results in

enhanced learning and retention (Rankin, n.d.). The education system tends to place a lot of

weight on tests; in turn, students put more effort into testing because these assessments can have

such a significant impact on overall grades. Testing is widely regarded as the best way to assess

knowledge, but thus far has not been considered as a way to facilitate learning. Research gained

from studying the testing effect can be practically applied to informing education systems on the

most effective ways to teach students. While plenty of previous research on the testing and self-

explanation effects exist, there is little information about how they interact with assessment

labels. In this study, we will examine how the label of the assessment as a “test” or an

“assignment” influences the testing effect’s robustness.

A study carried out by Roediger and Karpicke (2006) explored whether testing

effectively facilitates learning just because it provides an opportunity to restudy material.

Participants included undergraduate students from the ages of 18 to 24 and were given prose as

study material for the experiment. They were then assigned to a learning condition of restudying,

which involved studying the material twice, or a testing learning condition in which they studied

once and were tested once. Afterwards they were assigned one of three delayed interval times (5

minutes, 2 days, or 1 week) to take a final test. The major finding of this study was that

immediate testing after reading a passage tends to result in better long-term retention of material,
4
INFLUENCE OF ASSESSMENT LABELS ON TESTING EFFECT

rather than re-studying the passage. This study is relevant to our current experiment because it

focuses on the same demographic of college-age students. While the study did not include how

the label of the assessment as a “test” influenced the outcome, it did establish that testing helps

long-term retention above and beyond the factor of restudying material.

Another similar experiment examined the effects of testing on long-term memory by

studying whether post-lecture activity, provision of a test, and provision of feedback had any

influence on a person’s ability to recall information after a 1-month interval (Butler & Roediger,

2007). Participants were asked to attend three learning sessions during which 30-minute art

history lectures were given. After each lecture, participants engaged in a post-lecture activity:

either re-studying the material, a multiple-choice test, or a short answer test. A final short-answer

test session was administered 1 month after the learning sessions in order to asses long-term

retention. One of the major findings of this experiment was that participating in post-lecture

activities such as multiple choice and short answer quizzes improved long-term recall. This

further establishes evidence that testing enhances long-term memory more than simply

restudying does.

Testing has been shown to improve long-term retention, particularly when information is

successfully recalled from memory. One experiment aimed to examine how unsuccessful

retrieval attempts influence the testing effect (Richland, et al., 2009). Participants were asked to

read an essay about a condition called cerebral achromatopsia. They were assigned either to a

test condition or an extended study condition. In the test condition, participants were first given

two minutes to answer questions regardless of if they knew the answer, and then they were

allotted eight minutes to read the text. In the extended study condition, participants were given

ten minutes solely to read the essay. Immediately afterward, all participants were given an
5
INFLUENCE OF ASSESSMENT LABELS ON TESTING EFFECT

untimed test consisting of ten questions. They found that those who were assigned to the test

condition performed better on the final test than those who were assigned to the extended study

condition. This is important because it demonstrates another important aspect of the testing

effect: even when students are unsuccessful in a test, it still helps to enhance long-term recall of

important concepts. However, the question still exists as to whether labeling has any influence on

the testing effect when the content of the assessment is exactly the same.

Test format is another important factor to consider when looking at the testing effect. One

study explored how test format and the testing effect interact using open-book and closed-book

tests (Agarwal, et al., 2008). Participants were assigned to a learning condition (study-once,

closed-book test, closed-book test with feedback, open-book test, simultaneous answering, non-

studied control) as well as a study condition (study, study + test, study + test + self-grade test

with passage available, study + test with passage available, study and test simultaneously with

passage available). They were then given a delayed test one week later. Researchers in this

experiment concluded that the testing effect occurs with both open-book and closed-book testing

formats. While we are examining the effects of different labels on testing effect, this study

successfully demonstrates that the testing effect occurs in varying test designs.

An experiment by Ainsworth and Loizou (2003) also involved varying test formats, but

instead they focused on the self-explanation effect. Participants first took a pre-test on the human

circulatory system, followed by a review of the information and self-explanation of that material.

Half of the subjects reviewed information in text, while the other half did so using diagrams.

They then completed a post-test; both the pre-test and post-test involved a diagram and multiple-

choice questions. They found that the self-explanation effect was impacted by testing format:

information studied in the diagram format was connected to higher post-test performance than
6
INFLUENCE OF ASSESSMENT LABELS ON TESTING EFFECT

information studied in the text format. This is important to the study at hand because the self-

explanation effect is closely related to the testing effect. The results provide evidence that certain

test formats in conjunction with self-explanation may enhance long-term memory of material.

Our study investigated assessment labels and how they influence the strength of the

testing effect. We distributed a survey to students at the University of Pittsburgh. Participants

were instructed to watch a video on Indus Valley civilizations and asked to complete an

assessment based on their assigned condition. Participants were either given a text summary of

the video to restudy material, or an assessment labeled “test” or “assignment.” The content

presented within the “test” and “assignment” assessments were identical. We hypothesized that

assessments labeled as tests would produce a more significant testing effect than those labeled as

practice assignments.

Method

Participants

The participants in this one session study were 124 undergraduate students (M age = 20.8,

SD = 1.03) from the University of Pittsburgh. This sample included 43 females, 40 males, and

17 individuals who identified as non-binary. Participants who were not currently enrolled as

an undergraduate and within the age range of 18-24 years old were excluded. A link to an online

survey was distributed to subjects via email. Participation was strictly voluntary, due to the fact

that no compensation was given.

Materials

Consent Form. Participants were presented with four statements regarding their

understanding of the study and subsequently asked if they gave their consent to participate. This
7
INFLUENCE OF ASSESSMENT LABELS ON TESTING EFFECT

page also included general information about the purpose, time commitment, compensation, and

demographic requirements for the experiment. (See Appendix A)

Instructions. Participants were given instructions on how to complete the survey. They

were told that they would watch a video about the Indus Valley civilizations and instructed to

learn as much information as possible from this video. (See Appendix B)

Material on Indus Valley Civilizations to be Studied. On this page of the survey, a link

to the YouTube video on Indus Valley civilizations was provided. (See Appendix C)

Experimental Manipulation of Instructions. Participants were assigned to one of three

conditions. The first condition involved studying a written summary of the information from the

video. Participants in Condition 2 were tasked with completing an assessment labeled

“assignment.” Participants in Condition 3 were given an assessment labeled “test” to complete.

The content of the assessments for Conditions 2 and 3 were identical and included five short

answer questions. (See Appendix D)

Distractor Block. The purpose of this section was to ask participants questions unrelated

to the material they just learned in order to distract them. The first three questions of this block

had to do with demographics: participants were asked about age, education, and gender. The

fourth question asked participants to list as many U.S. states as they could remember in a span of

2 minutes. (See Appendix E)

Final Test on Indus Valley Civilizations. Participants answered 9 multiple choice

questions about the Indus Valley civilization. Each question had four possible choices. (See

Appendix F)

Debriefing. Subjects were informed about the purpose of the experiment and thanked for

their participation. (See Appendix G)

8
INFLUENCE OF ASSESSMENT LABELS ON TESTING EFFECT

Procedure

Participants accessed the survey through an online link. The survey began with a consent

form in which participants determined whether they were willing to participate in the survey.

Next, they were directed to a page that included instructions for what was expected of them in

the survey. The following page of the survey displayed a link to a YouTube video on the Indus

Valley civilization, which was approximately ten minutes long. Participants were then

randomized to one of three conditions to work with the learned material. Condition 1 was

restudying a written summary of the material (N = 25), Condition 2 involved taking an

assessment labeled as an “assignment” (N = 25), and Condition 3 involved taking the same

assessment labeled as a “test” (N = 50).

After completing the task specific to each participant’s condition, they were directed to a

distractor block in the survey. They were asked a series of demographic questions, including age,

education, and gender. Then, participants were given two minutes to list as many U.S. states as

they could remember. This was done in order to distract them from the information they had just

learned about the Indus Valley civilization. In the next phase of the experiment, participants were

given a final test of nine multiple choice questions on this material. At the end of the survey,

subjects were thanked for their participation and debriefed on the experiment.

Results

We used a one-way ANOVA to determine differences in learning when assessments are

labeled as tests versus assignments, and how learning using an assessment compares to the

control condition of restudying material. We found a statistically significant difference between

groups (F(2,121) = 8.054, p = .001). A Tukey HSD post-hoc analysis showed that participants’

performance in the test (6.95 ± 1.36 points, p = .001) condition was significantly better than
9
INFLUENCE OF ASSESSMENT LABELS ON TESTING EFFECT

performance in the control (5.52 ± 2.08 points) condition. While there was a statistically

significant difference between the assignment and control condition (p = .012), there was no

statistically significant difference between the assignment and test conditions (p = 0.61).

Discussion