To achieve enduring retention, people must usually study information on multiple occasions. How does the timing of study events affect retention? Prior research has examined this issue only in a spotty fashion, usually with very short time intervals. To characterize spacing effects over significant durations, over 1350 individuals were taught a set of facts and – after a gap of up to 3.5 months – given a review on the same facts. A final test was administered at a further delay of up to 1 year. At any given retention interval, an increase in the inter-study gap at first increased, and then gradually reduced, test performance. The optimum gap value was about 20% of the test delay for delays of a few weeks, falling to about 5% when delay was one year. The interaction of gap and test delay implies that many educational practices are likely to be highly inefficient.

Once material has been learned to a criterion of one perfect trial, further study within the same session constitutes overlearning. Although overlearning is a popular learning strategy, its effect on long-term retention is unclear. In two experiments presented here, 218 college students learned geography facts (Experiment 1) or word definitions (Experiment 2). The degree of learning was manipulated and measured via multiple test-with-feedback trials, and participants returned for a final cued recall test between one and nine weeks later. The overlearners recalled far more than the low learners at the one-week test, but this difference decreased dramatically thereafter. These data suggest that overlearning (and its concomitant demand for additional study time) is an inefficient strategy for learning material for meaningfully long periods of time.

More than a century of research shows that increasing the gap between study episodes using the same material can enhance retention, yet little is known about how this so-called distributed practice effect unfolds over nontrivial periods. In two three-session laboratory studies, we examined the effects of gap on retention of foreign vocabulary, facts, and names of visual objects, with test delays up to 6 months. An optimal gap improved final recall by up to 150%. Both studies demonstrated non-monotonic gap effects: Increases in gap caused test accuracy to initially sharply increase and then gradually decline. These results provide new constraints on theories of spacing and confirm the importance of cumulative reviews to promote retention over meaningful time periods.