New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Wait for It: Delayed Feedback Can Enhance Learning

When answers to questions come at unpredictable intervals, memory improves

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

It may seem that getting instant results would enhance learning, but various studies indicate a benefit to feedback that is delayed. Test takers are more likely to retain the correct answer if they receive it several seconds after providing their answers rather than immediately.

To understand why delayed answers improve learning, researchers at Iowa State University asked college students to give their best guess to trivia questions such as “Who coined the word ‘nerd’?” and “What color is a grasshopper's blood?” and to rate how curious they were about each answer. For half of the items, participants learned the correct answer immediately after responding to the question. For the remaining items, the answers either followed a four-second delay or an unpredictable interval of two, four or eight seconds. The students were then tested on the questions after engaging in unrelated distracting tasks.

The results, which were published in the November 2014 issue of Memory & Cognition, confirm the benefit of delayed feedback and show that it hinges on curiosity: in follow-up tests, participants answered more accurately when feedback arrived later but only for items that piqued their interest. The researchers suggest that delayed feedback encourages learners to anticipate the answer, which may increase their level of attention to it when they receive it. The effect was strongest when feedback was presented at unpredictable intervals, which is in line with previous studies showing that attention is enhanced when an upcoming event's timing is uncertain. So if you are studying with a buddy, ask that person to give you the answers after an unpredictable delay of a few seconds. If you are working alone, resist the urge to Google or look up an answer immediately and take a guess first.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


By the way, Dr. Seuss coined the word “nerd,” and a grasshopper's blood is white. If you were wondering about these answers, that delay may have just sealed them in your memory forever.

Tori Rodriguez is a journalist and psychotherapist based in Atlanta. Her writing has also appeared in the Atlantic, Women's Health and Real Simple.

More by Tori Rodriguez
SA Mind Vol 26 Issue 3This article was published with the title “Wait for It: Delayed Feedback Enhances Learning—But Only If You're Curious” in SA Mind Vol. 26 No. 3 (), p. 8
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind0515-8a

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe