Cainntear wrote:While this study is flawed in the way it tests, in my MSc dissertation I looked into productive vs receptive instruction (i.e. retrieval vs recognition) for beginners, and those who typed out their answers in the instruction got higher scores in recognition tests than those who received instruction through recognition tasks. The learners who had a mix of activities in their lessons got scores that were not quite as high as the ones who only did productive (typing/retrieval) activities.
Obviously you will know the relevant studies far better than I do, Cainntear, but isn't this also supported by a whole range of studies in non-language based learning, and the results from online SRS systems as well? i.e. you did a controlled study that demonstrated firmly what we should expect from other sources? Being forced to retrieve a memory yourself is always better than being prompted, at least in terms of strength of memory?
So that, essentially, recall is weakest on totally passive study methods (reading the word a lot); a lot stronger when we have to see it but passively recall it (e.g. recognition cards in Anki); and substantially stronger still for any learning method where we are required to recall it entirely, and especially where that is 'live' recall (e.g. speech)?
I'm sure Duolingo and Memrise have both pointed out how much better people do with typing the answers, and that most of us have experience that demonstrates this too.
In other words, the result of the study mentioned by the OP isn't unusual at all;
and it demonstrates why good SRS works, as well as other good methods of instruction, and why really passive methods - just reading the textbook again and again - are not. it demonstrates why SRS, as well as other effective methods, work, as well as why really passive methods don't work, for instance just reading and re-reading a textbook without doing exercises.
----edited to improve clarity----