Stop rereading.
Start remembering.
Flashcard decks built on the only two study techniques science rates “high utility.” Everything else is wishful highlighting.
Why it actually works
Rereading is the most popular study strategy among university students (84%[1]) — and one of the least effective. Practice testing and spaced repetition are the only techniques rated “high utility” across hundreds of experiments.[1]
Recall with testing vs rereading
Active testing more than doubled recall compared to passively rereading the same material.
Science, 319(5865), 966–968.[2]
More long-term retention
Retrieval practice beat even elaborate concept mapping for what sticks weeks later.
Science, 331(6018), 772–775.[8]
The testing effect is real
A meta-analysis of 159 studies confirms a moderate-to-large effect size for practice testing.
Psychological Bulletin, 140(6), 1432–1463.[7]
The full science — abstract, findings table & all 8 references
Abstract
Rereading is the most prevalent study strategy among university students (84%[1]), yet comprehensive reviews consistently rate it as having low utility for durable learning. In contrast, practice testing and distributed practiceare the only techniques rated “high utility” across hundreds of experiments.[1] NoReread implements the SM-2 spaced repetition algorithm, combining both into a single tool. Converging evidence from multiple labs suggests this approach can roughly double long-term retention compared to rereading alone.[2]
Additional findings
- 56% vs 40% — recall after one week for students who tested once, versus those who read the same passage four times. Psychological Science, 17(3), 249–255.[3]
- 90% — of participants learned more from spaced flashcards — yet a majority believed cramming was more effective. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23(9), 1297–1317.[6]
Table 1
Effectiveness ratings from Dunlosky et al., 2013[1]
| Technique | Rating |
|---|---|
| Practice testing (flashcards) | High |
| Distributed practice (spacing) | High |
| Interleaved practice | Moderate |
| Elaborative interrogation | Moderate |
| Rereading | Low |
| Highlighting | Low |
| Summarization | Low |
References
- Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Strengthening the student toolbox. American Educator, 37(3), 12–21.
- Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). The critical importance of retrieval for learning. Science, 319(5865), 966–968.
- Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). Test-enhanced learning. Psychological Science, 17(3), 249–255.
- Ebbinghaus, H. (1885). Über das Gedächtnis. Duncker & Humblot.
- Cepeda, N. J., et al. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 354–380.
- Kornell, N. (2009). Optimising learning using flashcards. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23(9), 1297–1317.
- Rowland, C. A. (2014). The effect of testing versus restudy on retention. Psychological Bulletin, 140(6), 1432–1463.
- Karpicke, J. D., & Blunt, J. R. (2011). Retrieval practice produces more learning. Science, 331(6018), 772–775.
Three steps. Zero rereading.
Read once
Pick a deck — or build your own. Key ideas become front/back card pairs. No highlighters harmed.
Test yourself
Flip, recall, rate yourself: Again, Hard, Good, Easy. Every flip is active recall doing its thing.
Space it out
The SM-2 algorithm schedules each card at expanding intervals — right before you'd forget it.
Read once. Remember.
Free. Personal decks. API for AI agents.