Learning Retention Statistics

Testing yourself improves long-term retention by about 50% versus restudying—use these findings to build courses that stick.
Magnus ÖbergAdrien Chevalier

Written by Magnus Öberg

Fact-checked by Adrien Chevalier

Statistics
35
Sources
35
Sections
6
Reading time
10 minutes
Learning retention depends on how people study and how organizations design instruction across settings. Without review, recall can drop quickly after initial exposure, but research shows retrieval-based methods like low-stakes quizzes and active practice slow that forgetting. Spaced schedules and repeated short sessions also outperform massed practice, supporting stronger delayed outcomes over days and weeks. This page summarizes the numbers on what works—and where retention gaps show up.

Key Takeaways

  1. 1The global learning management system (LMS) market was valued at about $28.1 billion in 2023 and is forecast to reach about $63.0 billion by 2030
  2. 2The corporate e-learning market is forecast to grow at a CAGR of about 14% from 2024 to 2030, supporting the continued use of retention-oriented instructional design
  3. 3The global corporate training market is projected to grow to about $368.6 billion by 2028 (from $~305 billion in 2022), suggesting ongoing budget for training systems
  4. 4Frequent low-stakes quizzes improve retention by repeatedly inducing retrieval that combats forgetting over subsequent weeks
  5. 5Ebbinghaus’ forgetting curve shows that recall declines rapidly without review, with a large portion of learned material lost after the first few days
  6. 6Spaced learning schedules reduce forgetting rates versus massed schedules in experimental studies of verbal learning
  7. 7In a meta-analysis, testing (retrieval practice) improved long-term retention by about 50% compared with restudying
  8. 8In a meta-analysis, distributed practice increased delayed retention by 0.7 standard deviations compared with massed practice
  9. 9In a landmark study, participants who received immediate testing retained information significantly better than those who only restudied
  10. 10In a randomized controlled trial of educational software with retrieval practice prompts, students using the retrieval condition outperformed a study-only control by about 0.5 standard deviations on delayed tests
  11. 11In an RCT comparing spaced vs massed practice within a learning app, spaced practice yielded higher retention with a statistically significant improvement (p < 0.05) on a delayed quiz
  12. 12In a systematic review, active learning approaches (which frequently incorporate retrieval and practice) are associated with higher student performance than traditional lecture methods, with an average standardized effect size around d ≈ 0.5
  13. 13In a meta-analysis, the average effect size of spaced practice (distributed over time) was about d ≈ 0.48 relative to massed practice across learning and memory tasks
  14. 14Testing (retrieval practice) improved delayed retention by a standardized mean difference of about g ≈ 0.30 to 0.45 across tasks in a major meta-analytic review
  15. 15The ACT Test Scale indicates that each additional 1 hour of studying can raise score by roughly 0.5–1 point on average depending on context, consistent with the importance of time-on-task for retention

Use frequent spaced retrieval practice to reduce forgetting and boost long term learning, supported by meta analyses.

Related reading

More related reading

02Forgetting Curve

6
  1. 1Frequent low-stakes quizzes improve retention by repeatedly inducing retrieval that combats forgetting over subsequent weeks
  2. 2Ebbinghaus’ forgetting curve shows that recall declines rapidly without review, with a large portion of learned material lost after the first few days
  3. 3Spaced learning schedules reduce forgetting rates versus massed schedules in experimental studies of verbal learning
  4. 4Retrieval practice slows forgetting compared with restudy in short-term and long-term memory experiments
  5. 5In classroom contexts, delaying tests (instead of immediate testing) can reveal larger benefits of retrieval practice on long-term retention
  6. 6Without retrieval practice, the rate of forgetting over time increases, leading to lower delayed recall in controlled experiments

More related reading

03Retention Research

5
  1. 1In a meta-analysis, testing (retrieval practice) improved long-term retention by about 50% compared with restudying
  2. 2In a meta-analysis, distributed practice increased delayed retention by 0.7 standard deviations compared with massed practice
  3. 3In a landmark study, participants who received immediate testing retained information significantly better than those who only restudied
  4. 4Short repeated practice sessions spaced over days produced higher retention than one long session in controlled classroom studies
  5. 5In a large-scale study, students who used retrieval practice techniques showed better test performance than those who used study-only approaches

04Method & Technology

5
  1. 1In a randomized controlled trial of educational software with retrieval practice prompts, students using the retrieval condition outperformed a study-only control by about 0.5 standard deviations on delayed tests
  2. 2In an RCT comparing spaced vs massed practice within a learning app, spaced practice yielded higher retention with a statistically significant improvement (p < 0.05) on a delayed quiz
  3. 3In a systematic review, active learning approaches (which frequently incorporate retrieval and practice) are associated with higher student performance than traditional lecture methods, with an average standardized effect size around d ≈ 0.5
  4. 4In a classroom study of low-stakes practice with feedback, performance on a later test improved by 20 percentage points relative to a no-practice control
  5. 5Learning apps using spaced repetition typically report “time-to-mastery” reductions on the order of 20–30% compared with unscheduled review in controlled comparisons

More related reading

05Learning Outcomes

4
  1. 1In a meta-analysis, the average effect size of spaced practice (distributed over time) was about d ≈ 0.48 relative to massed practice across learning and memory tasks
  2. 2Testing (retrieval practice) improved delayed retention by a standardized mean difference of about g ≈ 0.30 to 0.45 across tasks in a major meta-analytic review
  3. 3The ACT Test Scale indicates that each additional 1 hour of studying can raise score by roughly 0.5–1 point on average depending on context, consistent with the importance of time-on-task for retention
  4. 4In a national survey of adult learners, 57% reported they learn best when they can apply what they learn immediately (application timing that can support retention)

More related reading

06Industry Overview

11
  1. 179% of business leaders report that their organization has a skills gap that impacts execution and performance
  2. 272% of organizations report using learning analytics
  3. 362% of employees say they learn best through on-the-job practice and application rather than traditional training
  4. 4In the global workforce, 76% of employees believe they can learn more than they are currently learning at work
  5. 568% of companies use digital learning tools (LMS or LXP) to deliver training
  6. 657% of organizations use gamification to improve engagement in training programs
  7. 742% of organizations report that the learning content they use is not current enough, which can reduce the effectiveness of practice and review over time
  8. 894% of employees said they have changed their behavior because of training, which is consistent with retained learning being applied over time
  9. 976% of organizations use learning measurement beyond attendance/completion by tracking at least one additional metric (e.g., knowledge, behavior, or performance), supporting evaluation of retention
  10. 10Using spaced repetition is associated with a material increase in recall accuracy compared with one-time review in controlled experiments
  11. 11In controlled evaluations of learning platforms with quizzes, quiz-enhanced modules yielded higher retention than modules without quizzes

Cite this report

This report is designed to be cited. We maintain stable URLs and versioned verification dates. Copy the format appropriate for your publication below.

APA
Magnus Öberg. (2026, September 21). Learning Retention Statistics. Statpit. https://statpit.com/learning-retention-statistics
MLA
Magnus Öberg. "Learning Retention Statistics." Statpit, 21 Sep 2026, https://statpit.com/learning-retention-statistics.
Chicago
Magnus Öberg. 2026. "Learning Retention Statistics." Statpit. https://statpit.com/learning-retention-statistics.

Sources and references

35 datasets cited across this report. Attribution is report-level.

imarcgroup.comprecedenceresearch.comfortunebusinessinsights.commy.idc.comnature.compsycnet.apa.orgpmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.govjournals.sagepub.comacademic.oup.comscience.orgdoi.apa.orgsciencedirect.comieeexplore.ieee.orgpnas.orgaclanthology.orgresearchgate.neteric.ed.govconfirm.compmi.orgtd.orgmicrosoft.comatd.orgrand.orggartner.comlearningguild.comroyalsocietypublishing.orgdl.acm.org

8 additional datasets are cited and not shown individually.