Systematic Review of the Effectiveness of Neurodidactic Spaced Learning Strategies in Long-Term Memory

Bibliographic Data

ID22045832
AuthorsMarianela Silva Sánchez (0000-0002-0775-6826, Universidad Estatal Península de Santa Elena), Gertrudis Amarilis Laínez Quinde (0000-0001-9451-6443, Universidad Estatal Península de Santa Elena), Wilson Alexander Zambrano Vélez (0000-0003-1061-878X, Universidad Estatal Península de Santa Elena)
Year2026
Volume16
Issue6
Pages962
Publication date2026-06-17
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueEducation Sciences (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2227-7102 • E-ISSN: 2227-7102
PublisherMDPI AG (PUBLISHER • IT)
DOI10.3390/educsci16060962
OpenAlexW7165027374
LanguageEN
References cited61

In the current higher education landscape, students frequently resort to “cramming” or massed study practices, which often lead to superficial learning and rapid information decay rather than long-term memory (LTM) consolidation. This systematic review aims to analyze the evidence on the effectiveness of neurodidactic strategies based on spaced learning for LTM consolidation in university contexts. Following the PRISMA statement and the PICOS model, a comprehensive search was conducted in Scopus and Web of Science, identifying 19 empirical studies that met the eligibility criteria. The corpus was then subjected to a risk of bias assessment using RoB-2, ROBINS-I, and MMAT. The results indicate that neurodidactic strategies—categorized into operative, methodological, and socio-emotional types—are associated with improved knowledge retention in several contexts when learning episodes are distributed over time. Some studies report positive trends in retention compared to massed practice, particularly in health sciences and language learning, but the heterogeneity of methodologies and outcome measures limits definitive conclusions. Therefore, while the integration of spaced learning within a neurodidactic framework appears promising, the evidence should be interpreted as suggestive rather than conclusive, and further research is needed to confirm these observations across diverse settings. This systematic review has been registered in the Open Science Framework (OSF)

Empirical evidence · Empirical research · Higher education · Scopus · Systematic review · Anatomy and Medical Technology · Memory Processes and Influences · Neuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access