Re-Reading

Re-reading
The most important comparison is with re-reading, because (unfortunately) this is the most common study strategy used by students. In a study in which college students were tested on their recall of two short passages each about 250-275 words long, the students studied the texts in one half-hour session.

During each of four 7-minute periods, they either read a text, re-read one of the texts, or took a recall test on the text they didn't re-read — meaning that one passage was read twice, while the other was read once and tested once.

When tested a mere five minutes after the study session, the passage read twice was recalled slightly better (the recency effect in action). However, when tested a week later, the passage that had been read once and tested once (not counting the 5-minute-delay test, on which no feedback was given) was remembered decidedly better than the one that had been read twice. Those re-reading scored 81% on an immediate test, but only 42% a week later.

Those who read it only once, followed by a test, scored Only 75% immediately, but 56% a week later (the  difference, I note, between a passing grade and a fail!).

 In other words, while re-reading gave the immediate illusion of having been learned better , it was forgotten at a much greater rate over time (and bear in mind that this is only after a week; the gap is expected to get wider over time).

In a further experiment , using only one of the two prose passages, some students read and re-read the passage during four 5-minute study periods, while another group studied their passage for three of the periods then were tested during
 the fourth, and the final group studied their passage during the first period before being given three recall tests.