Dropping out of an online mentoring program for girls in STEM: A longitudinal study on the dynamically changing risk for premature match closure.

Premature closure of mentoring relationships decreases positive effects of mentoring or can even lead to negative effects for mentees. Past studies retrospectively investigated mechanisms of premature match closure. However, a deeper understanding of the dynamics that lead to premature match closure is still missing. In our study, we longitudinally examined the preprogram characteristics, program adherence, as well as program communication and networking behavior of girls (N = 901, M = 13.80 years) who took part in a 1-year online mentoring program in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM), comparing girls who dropped out of the program prematurely (N = 598) with girls who were considered as non-dropouts (N = 303). We used survival analysis methods to simultaneously analyze time-independent characteristics and time-dependent dynamics of mentees' communication and networking behavior. Besides mentees' interest in STEM and compliance with program specifications, a frequent and steady communication with their mentors decreased the risk for premature match closure, especially, if it focused on STEM. Mentors' mentoring experience, mentees' program-wide networking and their networking with other mentees reduced the risk for premature match closure. Regarding the STEM focus of networking, we found competing influences, which need to be further explored in future research.

Tests improve memory - no matter if you feel good or bad while taking them.

Based on studies demonstrating that testing promotes better long-term retention than restudying (i.e., the testing effect), testing has been recommended as a powerful tool to boost knowledge acquisition in educational settings. However, a factor ubiquitous in real-life learning contexts has been ignored to date: the learner's affective state. To examine whether the learner's affective state influences the testing effect, we conducted two experiments. We employed a standard testing-effect paradigm consisting of an initial study phase and a subsequent restudy/testing phase, and induced negative, neutral, or positive affective states either before participants initially studied short expository texts (Experiment 1) or before they restudied or were tested on them (Experiment 2). After one week, memory for the texts was tested. In both experiments, previously tested material was better remembered than previously restudied material. However, in none of the experiments, did the memory advantage of testing over restudying vary as a function of affect condition. Hence, the present results suggest that testing seems to benefit long-term retention independently of the learner's affective state.

Do students really prefer repeated rereading over testing when studying textbooks? A reexamination.

Experimental studies have shown that testing promotes better long-term retention than repeated rereading. Regarding implications for educational practice, based on a survey study seemingly showing that students prefer repeated rereading over testing when studying [Karpicke, J. D., Butler, A. C., & Roediger, H. L. (2009). Metacognitive strategies in student learning: Do students practise retrieval when they study on their own? Memory, 17, 471-479. doi: 10.1080/09658210802647009 ], it has been concluded that increasing the number of tests may boost students' achievement. However, a closer look at the survey study reveals that "repeated rereading" has been operationalised in terms of "restudying" which represents a term that may subsume a variety of study strategies. We reexamined the study behaviour of students in a more fine-grained way by surveying both their hypothetical (Study 1) and real (Study 2) study behaviour when restudying texts. Results showed that rereading is preferred only by few students early in the learning process, with almost all shifting to testing late in the learning process, and that rereading is mainly performed in terms of "rereading not understood parts", and rarely in terms of "repeated rereading". These results indicate that the implications of the testing effect for educational practice may have to be reconsidered.

Testing emotional memories: does negative emotional significance influence the benefit received from testing?

A large body of research shows that emotionally significant stimuli are better stored in memory. One question that has received much less attention is how emotional memories are influenced by factors that influence memories after the initial encoding of stimuli. Intriguingly, several recent studies suggest that post-encoding factors do not differ in their effects on emotional and neutral memories. However, to date, only detrimental factors have been addressed. In the present study, we examined whether emotionally negative memories are differentially influenced by a well-known beneficial factor: the testing of memories. We employed a standard cued recall testing-effect paradigm where participants studied cue-target pairs for negative and neutral target pictures. In a subsequent post-encoding phase, one third of the cue-target pairs were tested and one third restudied; the remaining third served as control pairs. After one week, memory for all cue-target pairs was tested. While replicating both the testing effect and the emotional enhancement effect, no differences between negative and neutral memories in the benefits received from testing and restudying were observed. Thus, it seems to be true that post-encoding factors do not influence emotional memories in any other way than neutral memories, even when they are beneficial.

Testing Memories of Personally Experienced Events: The Testing Effect Seems Not to Persist in Autobiographical Memory.

Numerous studies have shown that retrieving contents from memory in a test improves long-term retention for those contents, even when compared to restudying (i.e., the "testing effect"). The beneficial effect of retrieval practice has been demonstrated for many different types of memory representations; however, one particularly important memory system has not been addressed in previous testing effect research: autobiographical memory. The aim of the present study was to examine the effect of retrieving memories for personally experienced events on long-term memory for those events. In an initial elicitation session, participants described memories for personally experienced events in response to a variety of cue words. In a retrieval practice/restudy session the following day, they repeatedly practiced retrieval for half of their memories by recalling and writing down the previously described events; the other half of memories was restudied by rereading and copying the event descriptions. Long-term retention of all previously collected memories was assessed at two different retention intervals (2 weeks and 13 weeks). In the retrieval practice session, a hypermnesic effect emerged, with memory performance increasing across the practice cycles. Long-term memory performance significantly dropped from the 2-weeks to the 13-weeks retention interval, but no significant difference in memory performance was observed between previously repeatedly retrieved and previously repeatedly restudied memories. Thus, in autobiographical memory, retrieval practice seems to be no more beneficial for long-term retention than repeated re-exposure.