LAUSR

ABSTRACT Answering multiple-choice questions increases accessibility of the tested information and can improve accessibility of related information. However, multiple-choice questions with “none of the above” (NOTA) as a choice hurts accessibility of the previously tested information when NOTA serves as the correct answer (NOTAcorrect). Would prompting participants to recall an answer when choosing NOTA, and then providing feedback, reduce the costs of NOTAcorrect items? In the present experiments, participants answered general knowledge questions in multiple-choice (with a NOTA alternative) or cued-recall formats; half of the participants, when choosing NOTA, were prompted to provide an answer. Half of the participants received feedback. On a final cued-recall test assessing performance for previously tested and nontested related information, we found that NOTAcorrect questions hurt performance for previously tested items as compared to the cued-recall condition; but they facilitated recall of related information. Feedback improved performance for all previously tested information, but performance was still worse for NOTAcorrect questions than for cued-recall questions. The addition of a cued-recall component on NOTA questions did not influence accessibility. The results have implications for using NOTA in practice tests and help explain why using NOTAcorrect items hurt learning, even with feedback, supporting a proactive interference account.