Learning Science Cognition

Spaced Repetition Explained

Published by When Notes Fly

https://whennotesfly.com/concepts/learning-science-knowledge/spaced-repetition-explained

When Notes Fly article, fact-checked and corrected.

Corrected & verified
1 contributor 1 recorded contribution 1 correction

Who created and checked this page

Correction

Emir BaycanExpert Contributor

Correction history

Every accepted correction to this page is recorded with the exact change, so readers can see how the page improved over time.

  1. 29 July 2026 · corrected by Emir Baycan

    Corrected 6 fabricated or altered citations: a fabricated Wisher/Sabol/Ellis 2002 Military Psychology paper with invented statistics (the real 1999 study is a US Army Research Institute report, not a journal article); a fabricated 2019 University of Michigan Anki/USMLE study (the real 2015 study is by Deng and colleagues at Washington University in St. Louis, correlational rather than a controlled comparison, with a different statistic); an entirely fabricated 'Sense Education' spaced-repetition study (replaced with Duolingo's real published large-scale research); an Axonify/Walmart statistic that used the wrong metric (real figure is a 54 percent reduction in safety incidents, not knowledge retention) plus a fabricated, unverifiable TD Bank statistic; an entirely fabricated NASA Johnson Space Center astronaut training program and statistics; and Paul Nation's real vocabulary-threshold research altered (his real newspaper-reading threshold is 8,000-9,000 word families, not 5,000) with a fabricated pacing recommendation and acquisition-timeline comparison.

    Before

    Article attached fabricated studies, wrong journals/years/institutions, and invented statistics to real researchers, companies, and government agencies across nearly every case study.

    After

    Corrected each citation to its real, verifiable source and findings where one exists, replaced the entirely fabricated Sense Education and NASA claims with accurate real-world analogs, and corrected Nation's vocabulary thresholds to his real published figures.

    Why: This was one of the most fabrication-dense articles in the batch - nearly every specific case study needed correction, following the consistent pattern across this legacy content of real entities used as credibility scaffolding for invented precision.

    View the full record →

Full contribution timeline

  1. Correction 29 July 2026

    Emir Baycan: Corrected 6 fabricated or altered citations: a fabricated Wisher/Sabol/Ellis 2002 Military Psychology paper with invented statistics (the real 1999 study is a US Army Research Institute report, not a journal article); a fabricated 2019 University of Michigan Anki/USMLE study (the real 2015 study is by Deng and colleagues at Washington University in St. Louis, correlational rather than a controlled comparison, with a different statistic); an entirely fabricated 'Sense Education' spaced-repetition study (replaced with Duolingo's real published large-scale research); an Axonify/Walmart statistic that used the wrong metric (real figure is a 54 percent reduction in safety incidents, not knowledge retention) plus a fabricated, unverifiable TD Bank statistic; an entirely fabricated NASA Johnson Space Center astronaut training program and statistics; and Paul Nation's real vocabulary-threshold research altered (his real newspaper-reading threshold is 8,000-9,000 word families, not 5,000) with a fabricated pacing recommendation and acquisition-timeline comparison.

    Proof record →