The Effects of Spaced Practice on Second Language Learning: A Meta-Analysis
Author: Su Kyung Kim, Stuart Webb · Type: academic · Status: draft · Published: 2022-02-06 · URL: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/lang.12479
Licence: Paywalled (Wiley, Language Learning 72(1), 269-319); abstract quotable, full text requires subscription
Summary
The most directly relevant meta-analysis for a language-learning SRS product: 98 effect sizes from 48 experiments (N = 3,411) specifically on spaced practice in second language learning. Spacing had a medium-to-large effect on L2 learning. Longer spacing beat shorter spacing on delayed posttests (the ones that matter for durable learning), and equal versus expanding spacing schedules were statistically equivalent. Moderators included learning target, number of sessions, activity type, feedback timing, and retention interval. It confirms the spacing effect transfers from lab verbal recall to real L2 learning while warning against overclaiming for any specific schedule shape.
Insights
- Spaced practice has a medium-to-large effect on second language learning across 98 effect sizes from 48 experiments (N = 3,411). (high, draft)
spaced repetitionvocabularymeta-analysisResults showed that (a) spacing had a medium-to-large effect on second language learning — Abstract
- Longer gaps between reviews produce better long-term retention: shorter spacing matched longer spacing on immediate tests but underperformed on delayed posttests. (high, draft)
spaced repetitionretentionmeta-analysis(b) shorter spacing was as effective as longer spacing in immediate posttests but was less effective in delayed posttests than longer spacing — Abstract
- Expanding review schedules are not inherently superior to equal-interval schedules in L2 learning; the two were statistically equivalent, so marketing should credit spacing itself rather than schedule shape. (high, draft)
spaced repetitionpositioningmeta-analysis(c) equal and expanding spacing were statistically equivalent — Abstract