In partnership with

The Pretesting Effect: Why Failing First Makes You Learn Better

Hi there! Ray here with some mind-blowing learning science that might just change how you approach learning forever. Have you ever thought that intentionally taking a test before studying the material would help you learn better? Yeah, me neither! I always assumed tests were for after you learned something. But as it turns out, my Hogwarts-trained brain had it all wrong. The "pretesting effect" is a powerful learning technique that most people have never heard of, but the science behind it is fascinating.

Learn AI in 5 minutes a day

This is the easiest way for a busy person wanting to learn AI in as little time as possible:

1. Sign up for The Rundown AI newsletter

2. They send you 5-minute email updates on the latest AI news and how to use it

3. You learn how to become 2x more productive by leveraging AI

Sign up to start learning.

What Is Pretesting and Why Does It Sound So Wrong?

The pretesting effect occurs when you attempt to answer questions about material before you learn it, even though you'll probably get most of the answers wrong. When I first heard about this, my inner Sheldon Cooper was deeply offended. "But Ray," I told myself while adjusting my imaginary bow tie, "how can getting everything wrong possibly help me learn? That's like trying to win at chess without knowing how the pieces move!"

Yet research consistently shows that this seemingly backward approach actually works. Taking tests on material before studying it significantly improves your ability to remember that information later. In other words, failing first makes you learn better afterward.

The Science Behind Productive Failure

So what's actually happening in your brain when you pretest? When you attempt to answer questions about unknown material, your brain creates what cognitive scientists call an "attentional window" that primes your mind to be more receptive to the correct information when you eventually encounter it.

It's like when I tried to learn JavaScript last year. I spent hours staring at code examples, feeling like I was absorbing the information. But when I actually tried to write my own code first (and failed miserably), suddenly those same examples made much more sense. My brain was primed to notice exactly what I needed to know.

According to research by Soderstrom and Bjork, pretesting enhances learning through two main mechanisms: increased attentional processing during actual learning and enhanced self-regulated study outside of class.

How Pretesting Works Its Magic

Let's break down the pretesting effect into its key components:

1. Creating Knowledge Gaps

When you attempt to answer questions about material you haven't learned yet, you become acutely aware of gaps in your knowledge. As the great Yoda might say, "Aware of your ignorance, you become." This awareness creates curiosity and motivates you to fill those gaps.

A recent study found that taking a test before learning new information in a lesson consistently improves memory for that information, and this effect holds true whether the lesson is delivered through text or video. My personal theory is that those initial wrong answers create a sort of cognitive itch that your brain desperately wants to scratch.

2. Activating Prior Knowledge

Even when attempting to answer questions about unfamiliar topics, your brain activates related knowledge and concepts. This process of searching through your mental database strengthens neural pathways that will later help you integrate new information.

It's like when I tried learning Portuguese (my 47th attempt at a new language). Before diving into the textbook, I took a practice test first. Even though I mostly guessed wrong, the process of trying to connect Portuguese words to Spanish words I already knew created hooks for the new information to hang on.

3. Enhancing Attention During Subsequent Learning

Perhaps the most important benefit of pretesting is how it focuses your attention when you actually encounter the material. Research shows that pretests trigger an "attentional window" that opens during the lesson and closes after the pretested information has been identified.

Think of it like watching a Marvel movie after reading fan theories online. You're suddenly hyper-aware of every detail that might confirm or disprove your predictions. Your brain is engaged in a completely different way than if you went in blind.

The Strategic Implementation of Pretesting

Now that I've convinced you (I hope) that pretesting is actually magical, let's talk about how to implement it effectively. Because like all good spells, the details matter.

Optimal Timing and Placement

One fascinating aspect of pretesting is that the benefits extend beyond just the material that was pretested. There's a "broader benefit" where even information that wasn't on the pretest gets better encoded—but only under certain conditions.

Research by Pan and Sana investigated what happens when you manipulate where the non-pretested information appears in a lesson—either before or after the pretested information. The researchers found that memory of non-pretested information is better if that information is presented at the beginning of a lesson rather than at the end.

This suggests that pretests trigger an attentional window that opens during the lesson and closes after pretested information has been identified. Any information, including non-pretested information, will benefit from being in this window because it's more likely to be processed deeply.

Low-Stakes Implementation

The beauty of pretesting is that it works best when the stakes are low. You actually want to create an environment where failing is completely fine—even expected! This runs counter to how we typically think about testing, which is usually high-pressure and consequential.

Research conducted in undergraduate classrooms found that using short, competitive multiple-choice pretests before lectures significantly improved student learning, both for material that was tested and for related material that wasn't pretested. The key was keeping these pretests low-stakes and fast-paced.

It reminds me of my early attempts at Dungeons & Dragons. Those first few catastrophic role-playing sessions where my character decisions led to immediate disaster actually turned me into a much better player later on. I was primed to recognize good strategy when I saw it.

Pretesting vs. Post-testing: The Ultimate Showdown

While pretesting has impressive benefits, it's natural to wonder how it compares to the more traditional approach of testing after learning (post-testing). After all, if testing is good, when is it best to do it?

A study by Robey directly comparing the benefits of post-testing and pre-testing found that while both improved retention compared to extended reading, post-testing produced significantly better results on a retention test 7 days later. Post-testing also promoted knowledge transfer to previously untested questions, whereas pre-testing didn't always show this benefit. This suggests that if you have limited time for retrieval practice, testing after exposure to learning content might be more efficient.

But here's where I think the real wisdom lies: why choose? As a perpetual optimizer (my friends would say "obsessive tinkerer"), I've found that using both approaches gives the best results. Pretest to prime your brain, then study, then post-test to strengthen retention. It's like the learning equivalent of a superhero team-up.

How to Use Pretesting in Everyday Learning

Ready to put pretesting into practice? Here are some concrete ways to implement this technique in various learning situations:

For Students:

Before reading a textbook chapter, flip to the end-of-chapter questions and try to answer them first, even if you're just making educated guesses. Before a lecture, look at the lecture outline or topic and write down 5-10 questions you think might be covered. Try to answer them based on what you already know. For language learning, before studying new vocabulary, try to guess the meanings of words based on their structure or similarity to words you already know. In math and problem-solving, attempt to solve problems before learning the relevant techniques. Your failed attempts will highlight exactly what you need to focus on.

For Self-Directed Learners:

For online courses, before watching video lessons, look at the lesson titles and create your own quiz about what you think will be covered. In skill acquisition, before watching tutorials, try to perform the skill based just on what you already know. Your mistakes will become valuable learning opportunities. When reading non-fiction, before starting a new chapter, write down what you think the main points will be and any questions you have. For professional development, before attending workshops or trainings, try to solve relevant problems that might be addressed in the session.

The Neurological Magic Behind Pretesting

I always find it fascinating to understand why these techniques work at a brain level. It's like being able to peek behind the curtain at how my own mental machinery operates (which as a self-proclaimed nerd, I find endlessly fascinating).

When we attempt to retrieve information that we don't yet fully know, several important processes occur. Incorrect guesses produce error signals that promote memory for the meanings when they are revealed. It's like your brain puts up a flag saying "Pay extra attention here! I got this wrong before!" Recent research on memory suggests that changes in context (like moving from guessing to learning) can trigger reactivation of information in working memory. This reactivation process helps establish stronger long-term memory traces. The act of guessing activates related concepts and creates a richer network of associations for the correct information to connect with when it's presented.

It reminds me of my many failed attempts to learn to play the guitar. Each time I practiced incorrectly and then saw the right way to play, the contrast between my error and the correct method made the learning much more vivid and memorable (though my neighbors might disagree about the "memorable" part).

Limitations and Considerations

Like any learning technique, pretesting isn't perfect for every situation. Pretesting adds time to the learning process. If you're extremely short on time, focusing on direct study might be more efficient. For some learners, getting lots of answers wrong initially might be discouraging. It's important to approach pretesting with the right mindset—embracing errors as part of the learning process. For extremely complex topics with no connection to prior knowledge, pretesting might be less effective since there's no foundation to build upon. Some research suggests that learning styles and personality traits might influence how effective pretesting is for different individuals.

Conclusion: Embrace the Power of Productive Failure

As someone who has spent most of my life trying to avoid failure (and sometimes failing at that too), embracing pretesting requires a mindset shift. It means recognizing that getting things wrong initially isn't just okay—it's actually beneficial for learning.

The next time you approach a new learning challenge, remember to test yourself first. Ask questions, make predictions, try to solve problems, and don't worry about being wrong. Those initial errors are creating valuable pathways in your brain that will make subsequent learning more effective.

And if anyone questions why you're testing yourself on material you haven't studied yet, just tell them you're implementing evidence-based cognitive science techniques to optimize your learning outcomes. Or you could say, "Ray told me to do it." Either way works.

Until next time, happy (pre)testing!

Ray