GENERAL PROBLEM: On Learning.

SPECIFIC PROBLEM: to investigate how different learning strategies

(massed vs. spaced practice) affect the retention and transfer of complex
problem-solving skills in adults.

INTRODUCTION:
Learning, a cornerstone of human development, refers to the acquisition of
knowledge, skills, or behaviors through experience, study, or instruction. In
educational and cognitive psychology, understanding the most effective
strategies for learning is critical, particularly for tasks requiring complex
problem-solving skills. Among various learning techniques, spaced practice—
distributing learning sessions over time—has consistently been shown to
outperform massed practice (cramming) in terms of long-term retention and
application (Cepeda et al., 2006).
Retention, defined as the ability to preserve learned information over time, and
transfer, the application of learned knowledge to novel contexts, are key metrics
in evaluating learning efficacy. Spaced practice enhances both outcomes by
capitalizing on memory consolidation processes, allowing the brain to
strengthen and reorganize information between study sessions (Rasch & Born,
2013).
The spacing effect highlights the role of inter-study intervals (ISI) in
strengthening memory traces. Studies suggest that appropriately spaced
intervals allow for better memory encoding and reconsolidation, leading to
improved recall and problem-solving performance (Dunlosky et al., 2013). The
duration of these intervals plays a significant role; longer intervals are
particularly effective for tasks requiring prolonged retention, while shorter
intervals are suited for immediate recall tasks (Cepeda et al., 2008).
Problem-solving, a higher-order cognitive skill, relies heavily on the ability to
retain learned principles and transfer them to novel situations. Spaced practice
not only enhances the retention of complex information but also promotes
flexible thinking, enabling learners to apply abstract rules across different
domains.
While much of the existing literature emphasizes the benefits of spaced practice
for retention, its role in facilitating the transfer of learning remains less
explored. Transfer is particularly challenging in problem-solving tasks that
require flexible thinking and the application of previously learned principles to
new domains. This study addresses this gap by examining how spaced intervals
influence the retention of numerical reasoning skills and their transfer to
verbal reasoning tasks, both governed by a common addition rule. The
findings aim to contribute to a deeper understanding of the spacing effect in
promoting not only retention but also cognitive flexibility.

LITERATURE REVIEW:

Theoretical Foundations of Learning Strategies

The Depth of Processing Theory (Craik & Lockhart, 1972) provides a

foundational explanation for the benefits of spaced practice. According to this
theory, deeper, meaningful engagement with material—encouraged by
distributed sessions—leads to better retention and transfer. In spaced practice,
intervals between study sessions encourage learners to revisit material with
increased cognitive effort, promoting deeper processing and stronger memory
traces (Cepeda et al., 2006).

Similarly, Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller, 1988) underscores the advantages

of spaced practice by emphasizing the role of reduced mental load in effective
learning. In massed practice, the continuous presentation of material can
overwhelm working memory, leading to shallow encoding and poor retention.
In contrast, spaced practice mitigates cognitive overload, allowing for better
encoding and integration of learned material.

The Spacing Effect and Memory Consolidation

The spacing effect, first identified by Ebbinghaus (1885), is one of the most
robust findings in cognitive psychology. Spaced practice allows for memory
consolidation, a process where new information is stabilized and integrated into
existing knowledge structures. Studies by Cepeda et al. (2006) demonstrate that
spacing intervals promote durable learning, with benefits extending to complex
tasks such as mathematical problem-solving and logical reasoning.
Furthermore, neuroscientific evidence supports the role of spaced intervals in
enhancing long-term retention. Rasch and Born (2013) found that sleep
following spaced practice sessions facilitates synaptic consolidation,
strengthening neural pathways associated with learned material.

Retention and Transfer of Learning

Retention and transfer are critical outcomes of learning strategies. Retention

focuses on the learner's ability to recall or recognize previously learned
information, while transfer examines the application of that information to
novel contexts (Barnett & Ceci, 2002).

Spaced practice has been shown to significantly improve retention by

encouraging active recall and reducing the effects of forgetting over time. For
example, Dunlosky et al. (2013) highlight that learners exposed to spaced
sessions outperform those in massed conditions on retention tasks across a
variety of domains.

The transfer of learning, on the other hand, depends on the learner's ability to
abstract general principles from specific experiences. Research by Arthur et al.
(2010) indicates that spaced practice promotes cognitive flexibility, a critical
factor for successful transfer. By revisiting material across different sessions,
learners are better equipped to adapt their problem-solving strategies to new and
varied contexts.

Problem-Solving and the Role of Spaced Practice

Problem-solving, a higher-order cognitive process, requires not only the

retention of learned strategies but also the ability to apply them flexibly to new
challenges. Studies by Franklin and Brozek (1947) demonstrate that spaced
practice enhances problem-solving performance by allowing learners to reflect
and integrate strategies over time. When transfer involves transitioning between
domains—such as numerical to verbal reasoning—spaced intervals provide
learners with the cognitive resources to generalize their skills effectively.

The transfer-appropriate processing framework (Morris et al., 1977) further

supports the benefits of spaced practice for transfer tasks. This theory posits that
learning is most effective when the processes engaged during practice align
with those required during retrieval or application. In spaced practice,
distributed sessions create opportunities for learners to engage in diverse
cognitive processes, strengthening their ability to transfer knowledge to new
situations.

OBJECTIVES:
The primary objective of this study is to investigate how different learning
strategies (massed vs. spaced practice) affect the retention and transfer of
complex problem-solving skills in adults. Specifically, it aims to:
1. Compare the effects of massed practice (no interval between sessions)
and spaced practice (15-minute interval between sessions) on the
retention of numerical logical reasoning skills.
2. Examine how these learning strategies influence the transfer of these
skills to verbal logical reasoning tasks.

HYPOTHESES:
Retention Null Hypothesis (H₀₁): There is no significant difference in the
retention of numerical reasoning skills between the massed group and the
spaced group.
Transfer Null Hypothesis (H₀₂): There is no significant difference in in the
ability to transfer numerical reasoning skills to verbal reasoning tasks between
the massed group and the spaced group.

METHOD:
Design of the Experiment
The study employs a between-subjects experimental. Participants are randomly
assigned to one of two experimental groups:
1. Massed Practice Group: Participants complete all learning tasks in a
single continuous session with no breaks between tasks.
2. Spaced Practice Group: Participants complete the same learning tasks
with a 15-minute interval between each session.
The retention task involves numerical reasoning problems, while the transfer
task consists of verbal reasoning problems, both governed by the same addition
rule. The experimental design ensures logical consistency and comparable
cognitive demands across tasks, allowing for accurate measurement of retention
and transfer.
Participants:
The participants of the study were 30 adults whose inclusion and exclusion
criteria for the study are listed below-
i) Inclusion Criteria -
● Either Sex

● Age ranging from 18-25

● Minimum qualification 12th pass

● Score on Raven's Progressive Matrices corresponds to or above 50th

percentile
● Languages well versed in: English

ii) Exclusion Criteria -

● Neurological or Psychological Disorders
● Learning Disabilities
● Extensive prior experience or training in formal logical reasoning or
problem-solving tasks
Nature of Sampling: Purposive sampling will be used to recruit participants,
with random assignment to either the massed or spaced practice group.
Tools used:
1. Sociodemographic Sheet - It was designed to elicit relevant
sociodemographic information like age sex, education, occupation
2. Practice Task: Three sets consisting of 5 number series problems each will be
used to familiarize participants with the task format.
3. Retention Task: After the intervening interval, participants will complete
another set of 5 number series problems to measure their ability to retain the
learned information.
4. Transfer Task: A set of 5 letter series problems will be used to assess
participants' ability to transfer their problem-solving strategies from numerical
reasoning to verbal reasoning.
Procedure:
1. Selection and Rating of Tasks:
Five PhD scholars in psychology were asked to rate the similarity between the
practice, retention, and transfer tasks on a 5-point scale (1 = minimal similarity,
5 = high similarity). The tasks, including the numerical reasoning series for
practice and retention and the letter series for transfer, were evaluated for
congruence in terms of cognitive complexity and structure.
The mean and standard deviation (SD) of the ratings were calculated to assess
consensus among the raters. The results confirmed that the tasks were
sufficiently similar to each other, justifying their selection for the experiment.
This procedure was essential for ensuring that the tasks aligned well in terms of
content and cognitive demand, allowing for an accurate assessment of transfer.
2. Administration
The experiment was conducted in two phases: practice sessions and testing
(retention and transfer). Tasks were administered using printed materials,
ensuring consistency and minimizing external distractions.
Practice Sessions: Participants were seated individually in a quiet, distraction-
free room. Each participant received a printed sheet containing 5 numerical
reasoning multiple-choice questions (MCQs) for each session, along with an
additional sheet for rough work. Instructions for each task were delivered
verbally by the experimenter before the start of the session. Participants in the
spaced practice group completed one set of problems during each session with a
15-minute break between sessions. During the breaks, participants engaged in
light, non-cognitive activities such as drawing basic shapes. Participants in the
massed practice group completed all three sets consecutively without breaks.
Each session consisted of 5 numerical reasoning problems where participants
were asked to identify the next number in a series based on an addition rule.
Participants marked their answers directly on the provided sheets.
Retention Test: After 24 hours, participants were presented with a printed sheet
containing 5 new numerical reasoning problems. These problems followed the
same format as the practice tasks.
Transfer Test: Following the retention test, participants completed a printed
sheet with 5 verbal reasoning problems. These tasks required identifying the
next letter in a sequence based on the addition rule, assessing the application of
learned strategies to a new context.
Participants marked their answers on the provided sheets. The experimenter
recorded the time taken for each task using a stopwatch and calculated accuracy
as the number of correct responses.
After the data collection, the data was analysed, and the results along with the
conclusion were written.
Instruction:
Please sit comfortably. The experiment consists of three practice sessions,
followed by retention and transfer tests 24 hours later.
In each session, you will solve 5 numerical reasoning problems. Each problem
will present a number series, and your task is to identify the rule governing the
sequence and select the next number. Answer as accurately and quickly as you
can.
If you are in the spaced group, you will have a 15-minute break between each
session. During this time, you may relax or engage in light activities such as
drawing basic shapes. Participants in the massed group will complete all tasks
consecutively without a break.
After 24 hours, you will solve a new set of 5 numerical reasoning problems
similar to those you encountered during the practice sessions. This will measure
how well you retained the learned strategies.
After completing the retention test, you will solve 5 letter series problems. Each
problem involves identifying the rule in a sequence of letters and determining
the next letter based on the pattern. This task assesses your ability to transfer
learned problem-solving strategies to a different context.
There is no time limit for any task, but please aim to work efficiently. Feel free
to ask any questions before starting the experiment.
Ethical considerations:
All the participants were informed about the nature of the study, the expected
outcome and the fact that there was no immediate benefit (financial or
otherwise) participating in the study. They were also assured of anonymity and
confidentiality of the information share They are free to refuse participation or
discontinue participation at any stage without having to face any negative
consequences. They were also informed that once they have completed the
process of participating in the research, the information collected for them
would be used in research.

DISCUSSION:
The findings of the study indicate no significant difference in retention accuracy
between the spaced practice and massed practice groups, while a significant
difference was observed in the transfer task, with spaced practice
demonstrating superior accuracy. These results align with established theories in
cognitive psychology and learning, offering several plausible explanations.
Depth of Processing
The Depth of Processing Theory (Craik & Lockhart, 1972) provides a key
framework for interpreting these findings. In massed practice, participants may
engage in shallow processing due to the condensed and repetitive nature of the
sessions, leading to adequate retention for simple recall tasks but limited ability
to generalize or abstract learned principles. In contrast, spaced practice
encourages deeper cognitive engagement by introducing intervals that allow for
reflection, reevaluation, and integration of information. This deeper processing
enhances the application of learned strategies in novel contexts, which is crucial
for transfer tasks.
Memory Consolidation and the Spacing Effect
The spacing effect (Cepeda et al., 2006) suggests that intervals between
learning sessions facilitate memory consolidation, enabling learners to form
more durable and flexible memory traces. While these consolidated memories
may not significantly impact retention for straightforward tasks, they are
instrumental in enhancing transfer, where the ability to adapt and apply learned
rules is essential. Spaced practice likely allowed participants to revisit problem-
solving strategies with greater mental clarity and reduced cognitive interference,
leading to improved performance on the transfer task.
Cognitive Flexibility and Transfer-Appropriate Processing
Transfer tasks inherently require cognitive flexibility, the ability to adapt
problem-solving strategies to new domains (e.g., numerical to verbal
reasoning). Spaced practice fosters this flexibility by providing opportunities for
learners to engage with the material in varied cognitive states, promoting
abstract rule formation and adaptive thinking. According to the Transfer-
Appropriate Processing Theory (Morris et al., 1977), spaced intervals align
cognitive processes during practice with those required for transfer, thereby
improving performance in the spaced group.
Nature of Retention vs. Transfer Tasks
The lack of significant difference in retention tasks may also reflect the relative
simplicity of these tasks. Numerical reasoning problems in retention may rely
more on rote memory, which both massed and spaced practice support
sufficiently. However, the transfer task, involving verbal reasoning, demands
higher-order thinking and the application of abstract principles, revealing the
benefits of spaced learning more prominently.
Implications
These findings emphasize the importance of spaced practice for tasks requiring
skill transfer and flexible application of knowledge. Educational and training
programs could leverage spaced learning to enhance performance in scenarios
where adapting to new contexts is critical.
REFERENCE
Sadeghi, H., & McCreary, L. (2022). Spacing effect and its impact on learning
retention: A review. Journal of Intelligence, 10(4), Article 85.

Moulton, C. A., Dubrowski, A., Macrae, H. M., Graham, B., Grober, E., &
Reznick, R. (2006). Teaching surgical skills: What kind of practice makes
perfect? Annals of Surgery, 244(3), 400-409.

Pashler, H., Rohrer, D., Cepeda, N. J., & Carpenter, S. K. (2007). Enhancing
learning and retention through spaced practice: Research and its implications for
education. Institute of Education Sciences.

Carpenter, S. K., & DeLosh, E. L. (2005). Spaced repetition promotes efficient

and effective learning: Policy implications for instruction. Applied Cognitive
Psychology, 19(5), 553-565.

Woltz, D. J., Gardner, M. K., & Gyll, A. (2017). Individual differences in item
selection in learning multiple lists of paired associates: Contribution of working
memory capacity to learning. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 962.

Cepeda, N.J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J.T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed
practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis.
Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 354-380.

Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T.
(2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques:
Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological
Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4-58.

Donovan, J. J., & Radosevich, D. J. (1999). A meta-analytic review of the

distribution of practice effect: Now you see it, now you don’t. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 84(5), 795–805.
Arthur Jr., W., Bennett, W., Stanush, P. L., & McNelly, T. L. (2010). Factors that
influence skill decay and retention: A quantitative review and analysis. Human
Performance, 11(1), 57-101.