Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing01:13

Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing

633
Hypothesis testing is a fundamental statistical tool that begins with the assumption that the null hypothesis H0 is true. During this process, two types of errors can occur: Type I and Type II. A Type I error refers to the incorrect rejection of a true null hypothesis, while a Type II error involves the failure to reject a false null hypothesis.
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5%...
633
Errors In Hypothesis Tests01:14

Errors In Hypothesis Tests

6.1K
When performing a hypothesis test, there are four possible outcomes depending on the actual truth (or falseness) of the null hypothesis and the decision to reject or not.
6.1K
Column Efficiency: Rate Theory01:12

Column Efficiency: Rate Theory

1.1K
The rate theory of chromatography provides quantitative insight into the shapes and widths of elution bands. These bands are based on the random-walk mechanism governing molecular migration within a column. The Gaussian profile of chromatographic bands arises from the cumulative effect of random molecular motions as they progress through the column.
During elution, a solute molecule experiences numerous transitions between stationary and mobile phases, exhibiting irregular residence times in...
1.1K
Significance Testing: Overview01:04

Significance Testing: Overview

12.8K
Significance testing is a set of statistical methods used to test whether a claim about a parameter is valid. In analytical chemistry, significance testing is used primarily to determine whether the difference between two values comes from determinate or random errors. The effect of a particular change in the measurement protocol, analyst, or sample itself can cause a deviation from the expected result. In the case of a suspected deviation/outlier, we need to be able to confirm mathematically...
12.8K
Statistical Hypothesis Testing01:16

Statistical Hypothesis Testing

7.0K
Hypothesis testing is a critical statistical procedure facilitating informed, evidence-based decisions. It begins with a hypothesis, which is a tentative explanation, or a prediction about a population parameter. This hypothesis can be either a null hypothesis (H0), indicating no effect or difference, or an alternative hypothesis (Ha), suggesting an effect or difference.
Statistical significance measures the probability that an observed result occurred by chance. If this probability, known as...
7.0K
Types of Hypothesis Testing01:11

Types of Hypothesis Testing

28.5K
There are three types of hypothesis tests: right-tailed, left-tailed, and two-tailed.
When the null and alternative hypotheses are stated, it is observed that the null hypothesis is a neutral statement against which the alternative hypothesis is tested. The alternative hypothesis is a claim that instead has a certain direction. If the null hypothesis claims that p = 0.5, the alternative hypothesis would be an opposing statement to this and can be put either p > 0.5, p < 0.5, or p...
28.5K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Exploring the impact of elaborative rehearsal on mind wandering.

Memory (Hove, England)·2026
Same author

Are two heads better than one? Investigating the influence of collaboration on creative problem solving using the Remote Associates Task (RAT).

Journal of experimental psychology. Applied·2025
Same author

Toward mastering foreign-language translations: transfer between productive and receptive learning.

Memory (Hove, England)·2024
Same author

Collaborative Retrieval Practice Reduces Mind-Wandering During Learning.

Experimental psychology·2023
Same author

How do Students Regulate Their Use of Multiple Choice Practice Tests?

Educational psychology review·2023
Same author

An examination of retrieval practice and production training in the treatment of lexical-semantic comprehension deficits in aphasia.

Neuropsychology·2022

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Feb 23, 2026

Using Rapid Serial Visual Presentation to Measure Set-Specific Capture, a Consequence of Distraction While Multitasking
05:58

Using Rapid Serial Visual Presentation to Measure Set-Specific Capture, a Consequence of Distraction While Multitasking

Published on: August 29, 2018

9.4K

Collaborative testing for key-term definitions under representative conditions: Efficiency costs and no learning

Kathryn T Wissman1,2, Katherine A Rawson3

  • 1Kent State University, Kent, OH, USA. kwissman@skidmore.edu.

Memory & Cognition
|August 30, 2017
PubMed
Summary

Collaborative testing for key-term definitions is less effective and efficient than individual testing. This study found no learning benefits and increased costs when students practiced definitions together under realistic conditions.

Keywords:
Collaborative testingKey-term definitionsRetrieval practice

More Related Videos

Revised and Neuroimaging-Compatible Versions of the Dual Task Screen
07:52

Revised and Neuroimaging-Compatible Versions of the Dual Task Screen

Published on: October 5, 2020

4.1K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Feb 23, 2026

Using Rapid Serial Visual Presentation to Measure Set-Specific Capture, a Consequence of Distraction While Multitasking
05:58

Using Rapid Serial Visual Presentation to Measure Set-Specific Capture, a Consequence of Distraction While Multitasking

Published on: August 29, 2018

9.4K
Revised and Neuroimaging-Compatible Versions of the Dual Task Screen
07:52

Revised and Neuroimaging-Compatible Versions of the Dual Task Screen

Published on: October 5, 2020

4.1K

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Educational Psychology
  • Learning Sciences

Background:

  • Understanding key-term definitions is crucial for students across disciplines.
  • Learners report using collaborative practice testing for definitions, but its effectiveness is understudied.
  • Previous research has not evaluated collaborative testing under representative learning conditions.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the learning benefits and efficiency costs of collaborative testing for key-term definitions.
  • To compare collaborative versus individual retrieval practice under representative conditions.
  • To investigate the reasons behind potential lack of collaborative benefits.

Main Methods:

  • Three experiments were conducted with undergraduate students (total N=268).
  • Participants individually studied key-term definitions.
  • Retrieval practice was performed either individually or collaboratively in dyads, followed by an individual test two days later.

Main Results:

  • Collaborative testing showed no significant learning benefits compared to individual testing.
  • Collaborative testing incurred efficiency costs, taking longer without improving learning outcomes.
  • Experiment 3 explored theoretical explanations for the absence of collaborative benefits.

Conclusions:

  • Collaborative retrieval practice is less effective and less efficient than individual retrieval practice for learning key-term definitions under representative conditions.
  • The findings challenge the assumption that collaboration always enhances learning, particularly for definitional knowledge.
  • Future research should explore conditions under which collaborative testing might be beneficial or identify alternative collaborative learning strategies.