Reply to Sana et al.’s (2022) Commentary on Rest-from-Deliberate-Learning as a Mechanism for the Spacing Effect
Sana and colleagues (2022) have raised a number of challenges regarding the operationalisation of constructs and selection of articles to Chen et al.’s (Educational Psychology Review 33:1499–1522, 2021) suggestion that resting from cognitive activity could possibly allow for working memory recovery and so explain some of the data on the spacing effect. In our response, we indicate that the goal of our proposed framework was to try to resolve some mixed results of the spacing and interleaving effects and offer an alternative explanation for those mixed results, rather than proposing a theory of everything. We acknowledge that there are other important factors, which does not however, provide grounds for rejecting our hypothesis. Additional empirical studies are needed to determine whether rest and its effect on working memory are important when analysing the spacing effect.
History
School
- Science
Department
- Mathematics Education Centre
Published in
Educational Psychology ReviewVolume
34Issue
3Pages
1851 - 1858Publisher
SpringerVersion
- VoR (Version of Record)
Rights holder
© The AuthorsPublisher statement
This is an Open Access Article. It is published by Springer under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence (CC BY 4.0). Full details of this licence are available at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Acceptance date
2022-04-06Publication date
2022-04-15Copyright date
2022ISSN
1040-726XeISSN
1573-336XPublisher version
Language
- en