Over the years, YouTube became oversaturated with videos about study tips. However, like in every fad, there are always impostors that drain energy without giving any results. So, let’s examine four popularised study techniques from the scientific perspective. Are they worth your time?
Repeated reading
Frequently used by 84% of students, repeated reading is the most popular method of revision. Hypothetically, a rereading session should encode more material, filling the gaps in current knowledge. Over half of students call it their favourite strategy, so could there be any pitfalls? Research by Karpicke and Roediger exposed students to 40 words in Swahili (a language spoken in East Africa) and their translation. After correctly recalling once, participants were either completing practice tests or revising material. The final exam was scheduled in one week, and the results show an astonishing difference. Students who were testing themselves recalled 80% of the words, while participants assigned to rereading remembered only 36%. Interestingly enough, the highest mark for those rereading was the lowest mark for those completing self-tests. Moreover, rereading traps students in the fallacy of remembering because it does not highlight their weak areas. Being a passive process, it gives the “illusion of knowing” without testing the actual understanding. In the book Make It Stick: The Science of Successful Learning, psychology researcher Mark McDaniel explained this in the following way:
“On your first reading of something, you extract a lot of understanding. But when you do the second reading, you read with a sense of “I know this, I know this.” So basically, you’re not processing it deeply or picking more out of it. Often, the re-reading is cursory — and it’s insidious, because this gives you the illusion that you know the material very well, when in fact there are gaps.”
However, should rereading be completely eliminated? Psychology researcher Dunlosky mentioned in his monograph that rereading is of low utility, which does not equate to zero utility. Some studies have shown that rereading helps with memorising main ideas, but it is more efficient when spaced out over time. Therefore, it is inferior to other methods, but can be used when there is no energy or opportunity for more mentally demanding techniques.
Active recall
Active recall is a practice of testing yourself that relies on retrieving information from within the brain. The main point is that there are no other sources of information except one’s own search engine – memory. By triggering it, active recall strengthens the neural connection to memories, so next time finding this pathway becomes easier. The brain tends to resist at first, but this is exactly the moment when studied material moves to long-term memory. In fact, the more effort is spent on understanding and recalling information, the more likely it is to stick. Our brain is wired to prefer easier tasks, such as passive reading, but learning is an active process, and it should be challenging.
Revising with flashcards is the most widespread active recall method, and research shows it can significantly improve exam scores. Practice testing is another powerful and yet underestimated technique. Zaromb and Roediger revealed that students remembered 130% more words if they were given a test after discovering them for the first time. Another study by Balota et al. found that spaced practice tests improved memory even for elders with Alzheimer’s disease! Practising is so pivotal for consolidating knowledge that some researchers have argued that learning can occur during testing. However, less than 11% of students report using practice testing and only 1% rank it as their preferred strategy. It is definitely worth joining their number!
The Feynman Technique
The Feynman technique is a strategy where a student explains discovered knowledge to someone unfamiliar with the topic. It is named after the Nobel Prize-winning physicist, Richard Feynman, known for his ability to simplify complex concepts to the freshman level. This method goes beyond simple memorisation, helping identify knowledge gaps and check profound comprehension. Moreover, it encourages deep thinking processes, including synthesis, analysis, evaluation, creativity, and metacognition (thinking about one’s own thinking). It involves four steps, and the first two are writing down everything known about the topic and attempting to explain it in simple words. During the second step, learners might stumble upon inconsistencies, which will highlight weak areas in their understanding. After that, these gaps are revisited and clarified, leading to the ultimate goal of the practice: explaining in a way that even a child could understand.
Even though one 2021 study proved the Feynman technique to be useful for middle and high school students, there is no empirical evidence on its efficiency for university students. Therefore, there is some unresolved debate considering its limits. For instance, simplistic comparisons would be satisfactory for people with no background, while they would not be enough for those familiar with intricacies and nuances. Moreover, there is a risk of misinterpretation, which is not tested when explaining to someone not acquainted with the topic. Thus, some argue that it would be more beneficial to explain concepts to the person with a level of understanding that might challenge our own – for instance, older students who can correct confusions.
Pomodoro
The Pomodoro technique involves setting a timer and focusing on one task for 25-minute sessions with 5-minute breaks between them. After 2-4 such blocks, a longer break of 15-30 minutes is taken. Research shows that students complete tasks faster when they have externally established breaks and tend to have a better mood afterwards (however, further research is needed to prove the latter). By dividing long study sessions into smaller parts, Pomodoro may also reduce procrastination. According to one 2023 study, students perceive tasks to be less difficult and feel more concentrated and motivated when studying in blocks of 24-6 or 12-3 minutes. Hypothetically, monotasking and the elimination of distractions should reduce the time needed for task completion, but little research has been done to prove this.
Even though Pomodoro is eagerly recommended, rigid time intervals might interrupt the flow state – a very fragile feeling of being absorbed in the process without noticing the time passing. It is a highly productive and enjoyable state, framed by Johann Hari as ‘the deepest form of focus and attention that we know of’. It can fade away even after a small distraction, let alone strict breaks. The Flowtime technique, or “Flomodoro,” is a more flexible alternative where sessions last until a natural loss of concentration. The break’s length is pre-determined and depends on how long the work session lasts. There are no strict guidelines, but it is suggested to take an 8-minute break after 25-50 minutes, rest for 10 minutes after 50-90 minutes, and take a 15-minute break after working for more than 1.5 hours. This summer, one study showed that using the Flowtime technique made students less exhausted compared to applying Pomodoro’s structure. However, both techniques lack attention from researchers and empirical evidence on their effectiveness.
Whether you use Pomodoro, active recall, or just show up to the library and hope for the best, keep in mind that nothing is one-size-fits-all. Everyone has a different learning style, so explore what works best personally for you and stick to it.
