How to Retain Information From Reading

A collection of highlights becomes a question

Maya's first note contains three definitions and a long quotation about sunk costs. She recognizes all of it when she opens the page. Asked to explain why a past expense should not determine a future choice, she gives an uncertain answer.

She replaces the note's heading, “Chapter 4,” with a question: Which costs should matter when deciding whether to continue a project? Below it she writes a brief explanation, an example, and a reference to the passage she will check.

This does not make the original highlights useless. They remain a route back to the source. The new question gives her a reason to return and a task to attempt when she does.

An example exposes the missing condition

Maya invents a situation: she has paid for a course she no longer finds useful. She writes, “I should always stop, because the payment has already happened.” When she compares that answer with the chapter, she sees the problem. A past payment alone should not decide the choice, but future benefits and future costs still matter.

Her repaired explanation is more careful: Ignore the unrecoverable payment when comparing the options. Consider what each option will cost and offer from now on. The example helped her notice an overstatement that a copied definition had concealed.

A useful correction changes what you would say or do in the next example.

Now she can test the distinction with a different situation, such as a project that requires further spending. She checks whether her reasoning transfers, rather than asking whether the original sentence still looks familiar.

A small set of connected ideas

The next chapter discusses opportunity cost. Maya links it to her earlier question: continuing a project uses resources that could go elsewhere. Her note now explains a relationship between ideas, rather than collecting another isolated definition.

You can do this without making an elaborate diagram. Add a short sentence beginning with “This depends on…,” “This differs from…,” or “This changes when….” Then check whether the relationship is actually supported by the book.

Connections are useful when you can explain them. Adding arrows between every term can produce a crowded page without clarifying anything. A concept map is helpful when the relationships themselves are what you need to study.

The next review starts with an attempt

A few days later, Maya begins with the question and a fresh example. She leaves the explanation hidden until she has answered. This time she remembers the distinction but forgets to consider the alternative use of her time. That tells her what to check.

She does not rewrite all her notes. She repairs the missing part and keeps that question in her next review. Another idea she can explain accurately needs less immediate attention.

The general case for revisiting material over time is supported by the research on distributed practice reviewed by Dunlosky and colleagues. The exact timing here is illustrative; it is not a universally optimal schedule.

Try the same audit on one of your notes

Open a note you have not used recently. Before reading its answer, ask:

1. What question could this note help me answer?
2. Can I explain the idea and give a fresh example?
3. Which condition or distinction am I leaving out?
4. Where can I check the explanation?
5. When will I attempt this again?

If the note has no clear purpose, you can simplify it or leave it as reference material. Not everything you save needs to become a review question.

Personalized knowledge reviews in ez-learn connect later questions to concepts from your book. The same principle applies: an attempt helps identify what needs attention, and the source gives you something to check it against.

Further reading

Dunlosky, J., et al. (2013). Improving students' learning with effective learning techniques.