2.  Increasing the amount of hours spent studying and doing homework on a daily basis  Increasing the amount of work completed while studying on a daily basis  Adjustment Criterion form of intervention

3. Hypothesis Note-taking behavior is pervasive in education. Testing -If there are effects of note-taking format and schedule on test performance measures, post-study ratings of the experience and attitudes and intention measure -If there were differences in verbal ability that would lead to different answers in the above statements -If there is a relationships between verbal ability, study experience ratings, test performance, and attitudes and intentions

4.  Independent Variables › Format (how they took notes)  Traditional Linear Summary  Graphic summary (node-link mapping) › Schedule (when they took notes)  Multiple  Massed  Ad lib  Dependent Variables › Free recall › Recognition › Study experience ratings › Assessment of attitudes and intentions concerning stress

5.  Subjects: 175 students enrolled in psychology courses and they received experimental credit › 60 males, 115 females › Ages ranged from 18 to 39

6. Procedures  Participants were randomly assigned to a room that would dictate their format condition (3 rooms for each condition)  There were 3 sessions that occurred 48 hours after one another  Participants were presented with stress related material to read and then take notes  The information presented in each session differed and was not carried over to the next session

7.  Session 1 : signed consent form then completed Delta Reading Vocabulary test › Participants were trained in how to take notes using their format  Summarized for self, sentences and paragraphs › Practiced for 25 minutes  Session 2 : varied in schedule (when they took notes) › Multiple: read passing to the asterisk (stopping point) then summarize according to format- continue doing so until passage completed › Massed: read the passage entirely then used format as a study strategy › Ad lib: read passage taking notes throughout and use notes to study › When done they all completed a study experience questionnaire  Session 3 : all participants no matter the condition were given 3 minutes to review a passage then it was taken away › Given a free recall test › Multiple choice scantron test (15 minutes) › Attitudes and Intention questionnaire › Debriefing

8.  No note-taking schedule effect on test performance or personal relevance  Those who scored low on Delta Reading Vocab test: Node- linking mapping condition had greater personal relevance than those in linear summary condition  Those who scored high on Delta Reading Vocab test: linear summary condition had greater personal relevance than those in Node-linking mapping condition  Significant interaction of format and schedule on intention to learn about stress management › Multiple schedule significant in learning stress management › Massed schedule: lower intentions for node-link mapping › Ad lib: marginally significant in learning stress management  Personal relevance predicted attitude & intentions toward learning stress management. Discussion  Learner should use a strategy that gains knowledge and enhance behavioral intentions  Node-link mapping may have potential to do both › Can help engage low-verbal ability students

9. Hypothesis Even though the preferred study strategy for college students is note-taking and rereading text or notes retrieval may produce robust mnemonic benefits that exceed those of additional study.

10.  Independent Variables › Study conditions  Rereading  Note taking  3R’s (read-recite-review)  Dependent Variable › Test scores  Free recall test  Multiple choice  Short answer questions

11.  72 undergraduates at Washington University in St. Louis  Participated as part of course requirement or were paid $15

12. Procedures  3 study conditions (note-taking, rereading and 3r’s) › 24 participants in each condition  Each read 4 brief passages from Test of English as Foreign Language book › Divided into 30 idea units with 221-283 words › The order in which participants read the passages were counterbalanced  Note-taking group: read each passage twice & take notes while reading › Notes were only for helping memory and would not be accessible during testing  3R group: read each passage once, recite what they could remember into a tape recorder, then reread  Re-reading group: read each passage twice  3 mins to solve arithmetic questions & complete demographic questionnaire  Tested on 1 st and 3 rd passage on free recall test, then multiple choice test (6 questions), & 3 short answer questions (in that order) **1 week later: retested on same info & first time test on other 2 passages

13.  Time spent studying: note-taking > 3R’s > re-reading  Test scores on all test were better when tested immediately than delayed  Delayed scores were better on information previously tested  Free recall : 3R’s group scored better › No significant difference between other 2 groups  Multiple choice: No significant difference between any of the conditions  Short answer: No significant difference between any of the conditions  3R recitation: mean recall was significantly lower during recitation than during free recall test › Participants learned more during 2 nd reading  Note-taking: 75% of noted ideas were recalled during free recall test; only 32% of non-noted ideas recalled

14. Procedures  Each read 2 passages from The World Book Encyclopedia › Pumps passage: 93 units & 864 words › Brakes passage: 100 units & 915 words  Read the passages in the same fashion as Experiment 1 according to condition  Then read passages in self-paced fashion  3 min solving arithmetic questions and demographic questionnaire  Tested only on 1 st passage with free recall, multiple choice and short answer test (in that order) **1 week later: retested on same info & first time test on other passage

15.  Time spent studying: note-taking > 3R’s > re-reading  Test scores on all test were better when tested immediately than delayed  Delayed test: no significance in performance of prior testing over 1 st time testing  Free recall : 3R’s group scored better › No significant difference between other 2 groups  Multiple choice: No significant difference between any of the conditions  Short answer: 3R group and note-taking groups did better than the re-reading group  3R recitation: mean recall was significantly lower during recitation than during free recall test › Participants learned more during 2 nd reading  Note-taking: 26% of noted ideas were recalled during free recall test; only 7% of non-noted ideas recalled

16.  3R method seems easily learned and can be performed efficiently  3R method can produce memory benefits as well as generative learning › Can be applied in formal and informal learning settings  Students may see 3R method as more attractive because they can implement it without setting aside time for studying