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

While work on improving comprehension has primarily focused on open-ended generative activities, closed-ended practice tests using inference-type questions may also benefit understanding from text. Four experiments were designed to investigate how practice tests, specifically in multiple-choice and true-false formats, may support comprehension. Experiments 1 and 2 compared the two practice test formats to rereading. Both formats improved performance on a final essay test in Experiment 1, but in Experiment 2, only multiple-choice practice enhanced performance on a short-answer (SA) test. Experiment 3 introduced feedback on practice tests, but found no added benefit on the final SA test, which remained consistently better for those who completed the multiple-choice as compared with the true-false version of the practice test. Finally, manipulating text availability during practice tests in Experiment 4 improved performance on the final SA test. However, multiple-choice practice consistently led to better SA performance than true-false, regardless of text availability. The present work illustrates that the benefits from a closed-ended practice test with multiple-choice questions can persist over a delay and transfer to a set of new comprehension questions. At the same time, the results also highlight important constraints in that subtle nuances in question design can impact the observed benefits of practice testing on learning outcomes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Memory & Cognition
Published
2025-06-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-025-01726-9
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Memory Processes and Influences
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.43

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

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

Jennifer Wiley, Lena Hildenbrand
1 citations
Memory & Cognition
Memory Processes and Influences
1.43
article

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

Jennifer Wiley, Lena Hildenbrand
article en
1 citations

Abstract

While work on improving comprehension has primarily focused on open-ended generative activities, closed-ended practice tests using inference-type questions may also benefit understanding from text. Four experiments were designed to investigate how practice tests, specifically in multiple-choice and true-false formats, may support comprehension. Experiments 1 and 2 compared the two practice test formats to rereading. Both formats improved performance on a final essay test in Experiment 1, but in Experiment 2, only multiple-choice practice enhanced performance on a short-answer (SA) test. Experiment 3 introduced feedback on practice tests, but found no added benefit on the final SA test, which remained consistently better for those who completed the multiple-choice as compared with the true-false version of the practice test. Finally, manipulating text availability during practice tests in Experiment 4 improved performance on the final SA test. However, multiple-choice practice consistently led to better SA performance than true-false, regardless of text availability. The present work illustrates that the benefits from a closed-ended practice test with multiple-choice questions can persist over a delay and transfer to a set of new comprehension questions. At the same time, the results also highlight important constraints in that subtle nuances in question design can impact the observed benefits of practice testing on learning outcomes.

Memory & CognitionVol. 53(8)
University of Illinois Chicago (US)
U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Openalex Percentile: Top 19%
Memory Processes and Influences
1.43
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.