Rule #11. Spacing Effect.

Unlock knowledge retention forever!

Today I want to talk about one of my key methods to retain information. Spacing Effect.

Why do some people forget what they learn, while others retain knowledge for life? 

The key lies in the spacing effect—a powerful psychological phenomenon that enhances long-term retention of information. The spacing effect suggests that to retain up to 80% of information, you should revisit the same content on a spaced schedule—every 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 days, and so on, for up to 60 days. This method vastly improves retention compared to the classic 10-15% most people retain without it.

The concept of the spacing effect has been studied for over a century. One of the earliest and most influential studies was conducted by Hermann Ebbinghaus in the late 19th century. Ebbinghaus, a pioneering psychologist, laid the foundation for much of what we know about memory and forgetting, including the benefits of spaced learning. Since then, researchers like Dr. Roddy Roediger have further explored the spacing effect, showing how it can dramatically improve learning outcomes.

Funny enough, I didn’t know about this effect. You should've seen my face when I read about it after years of trial and error and not knowing what to call my strategy that worked for employee training. I had been applying the spacing effect in my training programs without even realizing it. It was one of those moments when I thought maybe previous lives do, in fact, exist. Haha.

The research from University of British Columbia (UBC) highlighted how the spacing effect could dramatically improve learning outcomes by allowing the brain to rest and consolidate information between learning sessions. This not only leads to better memory retention but also helps learners develop a deeper understanding of the material over time. It’s fascinating how something so simple—spacing out learning—can have such a profound impact on how well we remember and apply knowledge.

In a workplace environment, it’s challenging to monitor a full 60-day period, but the most critical repetitions are the first three. Here’s how I’ve always structured product (software, coffee, clothes, really anything) training using the spacing effect:

• Day 1: Start with a company introduction and an overview of the industry in which the company operates. This sets the context for everything they will learn.

• Day 2: Dive into software training with three key repetitions: a lecture, hands-on practice, and a quiz at the end. This ensures that the information is revisited in different ways, reinforcing the learning.

• Day 3: Conduct communication training, where employees practice soft skills while discussing the software or product features they learned the previous day. This not only reinforces their technical knowledge but also integrates it with essential interpersonal skills.

• Day 4: Return to the product with additional details and more advanced concepts, building on what was learned earlier in the week.

• Day 5: Conduct an in-depth review and have employees present what they’ve learned. This serves as the fourth repetition within the first week, solidifying their understanding through active recall and application.

By spacing out the repetitions within the first week of onboarding, you leverage the spacing effect to lock in knowledge more effectively. This approach not only helps employees retain information but also ensures they can apply what they’ve learned in real-world situations. The remaining repetition is on them and their manager through real work.

The spacing effect isn’t just for training programs—it’s a principle you can apply to any kind of learning, whether you’re mastering a new skill, language, or concept. By spacing out your practice and review sessions, you’re unlocking the secret to retaining knowledge not just for the short term, but for life.

No surprise why in many books you’ll read that the best teachers first learn, then apply, and finally share what they’ve learned. The last step helps the teacher master the new skill.

Very interesting, don’t you think?