This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Lundeberg, M. A. Articles by Fox, P. W. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Do Laboratory Findings on Test Expectancy Generalize to Classroom Outcomes?

University of Wisconsin—River Falls

Paul W. Fox

University of Minnesota

We conducted a meta-analysis of both classroom and laboratory studies of the effects of expecting a recall, recognition, essay, multiple-choice or true-false test on students’ subsequent achievement. In laboratory studies, studying with a recall set produced strong positive effect sizes for both discrete and prose materials. However, studying with a recognition set produced no effects with discrete materials and small negative effects with prose materials. In contrast, results from classroom studies indicated that students achieved most when preparing for the type of test they received. These results run counter to standard wisdom in the college study skills area and lead us to challenge the assumption that laboratory studies on expecting tests of recall and recognition provide a useful analog to test expectancy effects involving essay and multiple-choice tests in the classroom.

Review of Educational Research, Vol. 61, No. 1, 94-106 (1991)
DOI: 10.3102/00346543061001094


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?