Tailoring interleaved practice: Does adaptive sequencing boost the interleaving effect?

Adaptive learning tailors instruction to learners' needs. An open question is whether potential benefits for learning also apply to adapting the sequencing of study materials. Interleaving exemplars benefits learning by fostering discriminative contrast between categories. Therefore, adapting the sequence in interleaved practice to individual learners' specific confusion patterns could boost its benefits. To test this assumption, 259 participants learned to classify paintings by six artists under blocked, random interleaved, or adaptive interleaved schedules. Blocking produced better performance and higher category learning judgments (CLJs) during study. Both interleaving conditions yielded better learning outcomes immediately and after a delay, though not higher post-study CLJs. No significant differences emerged between random and adaptive interleaving. The benefit of both interleaved conditions was independent of working memory capacity. Adaptive interleaving increased transitions between similar styles but did not reduce confusion errors. These results suggest that adaptive sequencing may not provide additional benefits beyond random interleaving. • Adaptive and random interleaving outperform blocked practice in category learning • Adaptive interleaving increases transitions between highly confusable pairs • No learning advantage of adaptive over random interleaving • Interleaving benefits are independent of working memory capacity • Interleaved study lowers category learning judgments