Spaced Repetition vs. Cramming: What Research Really Shows

Most of us have been there. It's 11 PM, the exam is tomorrow, and you're surrounded by textbooks and cold coffee. Cramming feels productive - you're absorbing information rapidly, everything seems to click into place, and by midnight you feel ready.

Then three weeks later, you can't remember any of it.

This isn't just anecdotal. Over 140 years of cognitive science research has consistently demonstrated that cramming is one of the least effective ways to learn - even though it remains one of the most popular. Let's look at what the science actually tells us.

The Forgetting Curve: Why Your Brain Dumps Information

In 1885, German psychologist Hermann Ebbinghaus conducted the first rigorous experiments on memory and forgetting. What he discovered was striking: without any review, we forget approximately 50% of new information within the first hour, and up to 90% within a week.

This pattern - rapid initial forgetting followed by a gradual leveling off - is known as the "forgetting curve." It's been replicated numerous times, including a 2015 study that successfully reproduced Ebbinghaus's original findings.

But Ebbinghaus discovered something else: each time you review information, the forgetting curve flattens. The memory becomes more durable. This observation laid the groundwork for what we now call spaced repetition.

What Research Shows About Spacing vs. Massing

The technical term for cramming is "massed practice" - concentrating all your study into one intensive session. The opposite approach is "distributed practice" or "spaced practice" - spreading study sessions across time with gaps between them.

The evidence is overwhelming: spaced practice wins.

A 2013 comprehensive review by Dunlosky and colleagues at Kent State University evaluated 10 common learning techniques used by students. They rated both distributed practice (spacing) and practice testing as "high utility" strategies - the only two techniques to receive this rating. The researchers noted that these benefits have been demonstrated across different ages, abilities, and types of material.

A subsequent meta-analysis of these learning techniques, published in 2021, analyzed 242 studies with over 169,000 participants. Distributed practice and practice testing emerged as the most effective techniques, with effect sizes well above the educational research average.

How much better? Research suggests that spaced repetition can improve long-term retention by up to 200% compared to massed practice. One study found students who crammed retained only 27% of course material 150 weeks later, while students who spaced their learning retained 82%.

Why Cramming Feels Effective (But Isn't)

Here's the paradox: cramming often feels more effective than spacing, even when it isn't.

Cognitive psychologists call this the "fluency illusion." When you cram, information becomes temporarily familiar. You can recognize it easily. This familiarity creates a subjective sense of mastery - you feel like you know the material.

But recognition is not the same as recall. The brain processes familiarity in different regions (like the visual cortex) than it processes recall (which relies more on the frontal cortex and temporal lobe). Cramming primarily activates familiarity-based processing, which is why the material feels accessible during your study session but becomes unretrievable when you actually need it.

Research by Karpicke and Roediger at Washington University demonstrated this disconnect vividly. In their studies, students' predictions of their own performance were essentially uncorrelated with their actual performance after spacing and testing. Students consistently overestimated how much they had learned from massed study.

The Testing Effect: Why Retrieval Builds Memory

Spacing isn't just about timing - it's also about what you do during study sessions. Research has revealed a powerful companion to distributed practice: the testing effect (also called retrieval practice).

Roediger and Karpicke's research found that actively testing yourself on material produces better long-term retention than additional study time, even when tests are given without feedback. In one experiment, students who repeatedly tested themselves showed dramatically better retention on delayed tests compared to students who repeatedly studied the material.

The key insight: the act of retrieving information from memory strengthens that memory far more than simply re-exposing yourself to the information. Every time you successfully recall something, you're reinforcing the neural pathways that enable future recall.

This has profound implications for how we should study. Rereading notes or highlighting passages are passive activities that don't require retrieval. Flashcards, practice tests, and self-quizzing force retrieval - and that's what builds durable memory.

The Neuroscience: What's Actually Happening in Your Brain

Why does spacing work at the neural level?

Research by neurobiologists Christine Gall and Gary Lynch at UC Irvine found that mice trained in multiple short sessions spaced one hour apart performed significantly better on memory tests than mice trained in a single prolonged session.

The explanation: brain synapses encode memories more effectively when activated briefly and repeatedly, rather than continuously. Prolonged cramming engages only one set of synapses, while spaced repetition engages multiple sets. As Lynch put it, "It's as if your brain is working at full power."

Additionally, sleep plays a critical role in memory consolidation - the process of stabilizing and organizing newly encoded information. During sleep, your brain replays and rehearses learned information, strengthening neural connections. Cramming typically involves sleep deprivation, which disrupts this consolidation process.

Optimal Spacing: How to Apply This Research

So how should you space your study sessions? Research suggests several principles:

Start with shorter intervals, then expand. Review new material within 24 hours of first learning it. Then extend the interval - perhaps 3 days, then a week, then two weeks, then a month. Each successful retrieval at a longer interval strengthens the memory further.

Include retrieval practice. Don't just reread. Quiz yourself. Use flashcards. Try to recall information from memory before checking your notes. The effort of retrieval, even when you don't fully succeed, strengthens learning.

Interleave different topics. Mixing different subjects or problem types within a study session (interleaving) has also been shown to improve learning, though it feels harder than focusing on one topic at a time.

Keep sessions relatively short. Multiple 20-30 minute sessions spread across days will outperform a single 5-hour marathon.

If you're looking to put these principles into practice, tools like byHeart can help by automatically scheduling your reviews at optimal intervals and turning your own study materials into flashcards that encourage active retrieval.

The Bottom Line

The research is clear: if your goal is long-term retention and actual understanding - not just surviving tomorrow's exam - cramming is among the worst approaches you can take.

Spaced repetition combined with active retrieval practice is dramatically more effective. It requires more planning and discipline, but the payoff is substantial: better grades, deeper understanding, and knowledge that actually sticks.

The irony is that spaced learning often takes less total time than cramming, because you're not wasting hours relearning material you've forgotten. You're building durable memories from the start.

---

Sources and Further Reading

Foundational Research

• Ebbinghaus, H. (1885). Memory: A Contribution to Experimental Psychology. (Original work on the forgetting curve)
• Murre, J. M. & Dros, J. (2015). Replication and Analysis of Ebbinghaus' Forgetting Curve. PLOS ONE. Read the full study

Testing Effect and Retrieval Practice

• Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). The Power of Testing Memory: Basic Research and Implications for Educational Practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(3), 181-210. Read the full study
• Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). The Critical Importance of Retrieval for Learning. Science, 319(5865), 966-968.

Comprehensive Reviews of Study Techniques

• Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving Students' Learning With Effective Learning Techniques. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4-58. Read the full study
• Donoghue, G. M., & Hattie, J. A. (2021). A Meta-Analysis of Ten Learning Techniques. Frontiers in Education. Read the full study

Spacing Effect Research

• Voice, A., & Stirton, A. (2020). Spaced Repetition: towards more effective learning in STEM. New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences. Read the full study

Neuroscience of Learning

• BrainFacts.org (2021). The Neuroscience Behind the Spacing Effect. Read the full article

Classroom Application Studies

• Roediger, H. L., Agarwal, P. K., McDaniel, M. A., & McDermott, K. B. (2011). Test-Enhanced Learning in the Classroom: Long-Term Improvements From Quizzing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied.

Metacognition and Learning Illusions

• McIntyre, S. & Munson, J. (2008). Exploring Cramming: Student Behaviours, Beliefs, and Learning Retention in the Principles of Marketing Course. Journal of Marketing Education, 30(3), 226-243.

Evidence on Spacing Effect Magnitude

• PMC (2022). Evidence of the Spacing Effect and Influences on Perceptions of Learning and Science Curricula. Read the full study