Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Spaced, massed, and summary treatments as review strategies for ITV production

  • Articles
  • Published:
AV communication review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ash, P. The relative effectiveness of massed versus spaced film presentation.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1950, {iy14}, 19–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ash, P., & Jaspen, N. The effects and interactions of rate of development, repetition, participation and room illumination on learning from a rear projected film. Technical Report SFD 269-7-39, Port Washington, N.Y.: U.S. Special Devices Center, 1953.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ausubel, D. P. & Youssef, M. The effect of spaced repetition on meaningful retention.Journal of General Psychology, 1965,73, 147–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, L. J., Campeau, P. O., Gagné, R. M., & May, M. A.Instructional media: A procedure for the design of multi-media instruction, a critical review of research and suggestions for future research. U.S. Office of Education, Pittsburgh: American Institutes for Research, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C.Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand-McNally, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coldevin, G. O. The differential effects of voice-over, superimposition and combined review treatments as production strategies for ETV programming. Paper presented at the International Conference on Educational Technology, Liverpool, England, April 8–11, 1974.

  • Chu, G., & Schramm, W.Learning from television: What the research says. Washington: National Association of Educational Broadcasters, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebel, R. L.Measuring educational achievement. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faison, E. W., Rose, N., & Podell, J. E. The effects of rest pauses during training film instruction. In A.A. Lumsdaine (Ed.),Student response in programmed instruction: A symposium. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council, 1961. Pp. 506–508.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, R. M. Some new views on learning and instruction.IEEE Transactions on Education, 1971, E-14, 26–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, G. N.Classroom television. New York: Hastings House, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ives, J. M. A strategy for instructional television research.AV Communication Review, 1971,19, 149–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirk, R. E.Experimental design procedures for the behavioral sciences. Belmont, Calif: Brooks-Cole, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B.Taxonomy of educational objectives handbook II: Affective domain. New York: David McKay, 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lumsdaine, A. A. Instruments and media of instruction. In N. L. Gage (Ed.),Handbook of research on teaching. Chicago: Rand-McNally, 1963. Pp. 583–682.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maccoby, N., & Sheffield, F. D. Combining practice with demonstration in teaching complex sequences: Summary and interpretation. In A. A. Lumsdaine (Ed.),Student response in programmed instruction: A symposium. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences— National Research Council, 1961. Pp. 77–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, W. J. Some factors influencing the effectiveness of demonstrational films: Repetition of instructions, slow motion, distribution of showings and explanatory narration. In A. A. Lumsdaine (Ed.),Student response in programmed instruction: A symposium. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council, 1961. Pp. 187–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J., & Klier, S. The effect on active-rehearsal types of review of massed and spaced review techniques. In A. A. Lumsdaine (Ed.),Student response in programmed instruction: A symposium. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council, 1961. Pp. 518–519.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J., & Levine, S. A study of the effects of different types of review and of structuring subtitles on the amount of learning from a training film. In A. A. Lumsdaine (Ed.),Student response in programmed instruction: A symposium. Washingtion, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council, 1961, Pp. 519–521.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pockrass, R. M. Effects on learning continuous and interrupted exhibition of educational television programs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, 1960.

  • Reynolds, J. H., & Glaser, R. Effects of repetition and spaced review upon retention of a complex learning task.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1964,55, 297–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothkopf, E. A. Textual constraint as a function of repeated inspection.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1968,1, 20–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schramm, W. What the research says. In W. Schramm (Ed.),Quality in instructional television. Honolulu: The University Press of Hawaii, 1972. Pp. 44–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. U., & Smith, M. F.Cybernetic principles of learning and educational design. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Underwood, B. J. Ten years of massed practice on distributed practice.Psychological Review, 1961,68, 229–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Underwood, B. J., & Ekstrand, B. R. Effect of distributed practice on paired associate learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1967, 73(4), Pt. 2, 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate Studies in Educational Technology, Concordia University, Sir George Williams Campus, H3G 1M8, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

    Gary O. Coldevin (assistant professor)

Authors
  1. Gary O. Coldevin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This study was facilitated through a research contract with Communications Canada under the direction of the author. The author expresses appreciation to Richard Adams, Ludy Edwards and Barry Wagner, graduate students and research assistants at Sir George Williams University during the conduct of this study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Coldevin, G.O. Spaced, massed, and summary treatments as review strategies for ITV production. AVCR 23, 289–303 (1975). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02769091

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02769091

Keywords

Search

Navigation