The Problem: Why Learning Doesn’t Stick for Early-Stage Researchers
Alex was in his final year of a PhD when the pressure caught up with him. He was living what many early-stage researchers experience but rarely talk about: chronic stress, persistent anxiety, and a sense of falling behind no matter how much effort he poured in. His sleep was fragmented, his attention scattered, and even when he attended the well-meaning one-day mental health workshops offered by his institution, the effects wore off by Monday.
This isn’t a story about one person. It’s a pattern across academia. Early-stage researchers are navigating a system that places enormous demands on their cognitive and emotional bandwidth during one of the most pivotal stages of their careers. Institutes have recognised this and responded with short-term training formats, such as the classic one- or two-day workshop, a lecture on productivity, or even the much-needed mental health day. These interventions are valuable. They excel in three areas: raising awareness, sparking critical conversations, and providing practical insights.
But here’s where it backfires: they don’t create lasting change.
Table Of Contents:
- The Problem: Why Learning Doesn’t Stick for Early-Stage Researchers
- Why Quick Fixes Aren’t Enough: The Role of Time and Memory
- What Is Spaced Repetition and Why It Works
- How We Build Spaced Repetition into Our Training
- Alex’s Transformation: A Closer Look
- The Bigger Picture: Spaced Repetition as a Path to Institutional Impact
- Let’s Support Your Researchers With Learning That Lasts
- References
Why Quick Fixes Aren’t Enough: The Role of Time and Memory
We know from science what Alex learned the hard way: transformation takes time. Learning new strategies is only the first step. Applying them consistently, reflecting on them, and making them habits is where real change occurs.
There’s a second factor that works against quick fixes: memory decay. Even the most inspiring talk or insightful workshop is fighting an uphill battle against our brain’s natural tendency to forget.
This is what German psychologist Hermann Ebbinghaus uncovered in the late 19th century when he developed the Forgetting Curve. His findings showed that within 20 minutes of a learning session, people can forget almost 40% of the information shared. Within a day, that number often climbs past 60%. And by the end of the week? Upwards of 80% of the knowledge can be lost (Ebbinghaus, 1885/1913).
For Alex, that meant all the valuable advice from previous trainings blurred into background noise. Without reinforcement, those impulses couldn’t evolve into sustainable strategies. What he needed was not another one-off intervention. He needed structure. He needed time. And he needed spaced repetition.
What Is Spaced Repetition and Why It Works
Spaced repetition is a scientifically backed method of reviewing material at carefully increasing intervals to optimise memory consolidation. Unlike cramming, which temporarily overloads working memory and yields poor long-term retention, spaced repetition aligns with how the brain naturally encodes and retains information over time.
Ebbinghaus’ research gave us the forgetting curve, but it also gave us hope: the curve can be flattened. With each timely review, memory strength rebounds. A single repetition shortly after the initial learning event can nearly return retention to 100%. Further spaced reviews at one day, a week, and then a month not only reinforce memory but also increase the durability of the knowledge.
Neuroscientific studies show that this repeated activation of the same neural circuits, especially when spaced out, strengthens the synaptic connections. Hebbian learning, captured in the phrase “neurons that fire together wire together,” underpins this. Each repetition in a spaced schedule signals the brain: “This matters. We’ll need it again, so better store it long-term.“
More than that, spaced repetition supports metacognition. It helps learners reflect on what they’ve retained, identify gaps, and determine how to fill them. This makes it not just a memory technique but a learning philosophy. It builds confidence alongside competence.
Consider this: even fruit flies show improved learning when their exposure to stimuli is spaced out. In one experiment, flies exposed to a shocking odour learned to avoid it longer when their experiences were spaced compared to when they occurred in quick succession (Mery & Kawecki, 2002). The principle is evolutionarily ingrained.
Cognitive load theory also supports this. When learners are overwhelmed, they retain less. By spacing content over time, the learner’s cognitive load is reduced, making space for deeper learning. Each interval becomes an opportunity for retrieval, which strengthens memory through active recall.
And we see this across disciplines. In a meta-analysis of 254 studies, distributed practice was consistently more effective than massed practice, with particularly strong effects for complex content and delayed assessments (Cepeda et al., 2006). The benefit is robust and well-documented.
For researchers, this means that critical skills, such as managing time, navigating setbacks, or reframing cognitive distortions, must be introduced, practised, reinforced, and reintegrated across multiple points in time. Spaced repetition isn’t about rote memorisation. It’s about sustained transformation through scaffolded experience.
How We Build Spaced Repetition into Our Training
This principle is foundational to how we’ve designed our trainings, particularly the Fast Forward and Resilience Training courses.
In our Resilience Training, participants engage in a multi-layered learning experience that stretches across nine weeks. Each Monday workshop is a structured blend of content, reflection, and interactive exercises. These serve as the “first repetitions”, the initial activation of the concepts to reinforce learning.
But it doesn’t stop there. Within 24 hours, participants use workbooks to deepen their understanding through journaling, exercises, and real-world application. Throughout the week, they engage in short prompts and micro-reflections that extend the learning thread. By the end of the week, they submit an assignment that invites them to apply, synthesise, and reflect, offering delayed feedback that enhances learning even further.
Each subsequent week revisits previous themes in new ways: stress is connected to attention, attention to emotion regulation, and emotion regulation to relationships. This isn’t accidental, it’s planned, iterative, and designed to build memory and behaviour change. It’s interlaced learning in practice.
In Fast Forward, our 7-week course on personal productivity and project management, the pacing allows for the development of scaffolded skills. Tools and techniques for multiscale planning, prioritisation and time management are introduced, used, revisited, and refined across weekly challenges. Participants reflect on what worked, adjust their approach, and see results unfold in real time.
Spaced repetition here isn’t abstract; it becomes action.
Alex’s Transformation: A Closer Look
When Alex joined our Resilience Training, his Personal Resilience Indicator (PRI) score was 1%. That’s not unusually low; it’s the lowest possible score, and many early-stage researchers start there—the cohort average hovers around 16%, so Alex wasn’t an exception; he was the rule.
His story reflects what many researchers go through: a cycle of firefighting through deadlines, social catch-ups that feel like second shifts, and nights broken by anxiety. He wasn’t lazy. He wasn’t disengaged. He was just depleted.
The early weeks of the training were hard. He resisted journaling. He skipped workbook entries. But he showed up. And something shifted around week three. In a group exercise on attentional systems, Alex volunteered for a demo in front of the class. For the first time, he saw his own patterns reflected clearly: how stress narrowed his focus and how breath shifted his state. That was a turning point.
He began experimenting. Adjusted his sleep rhythm. Started using the Sleep Tracker and the Emotions Diary. Opened up during small group breakouts. His weekly reflections gained depth. He stopped using his weekends to “recover” and started using them to recharge.
By week nine, Alex’s score had climbed to over 60%. But more importantly, his sense of agency returned, and he slept through a full night without waking up for the first time in over a year.
He came back six months later as a tutor. That second exposure was a game-changer. He saw the curriculum from a new angle. He had to explain it, not just apply it. He read dozens of reflections, guided group discussions, and helped peers navigate moments he once found impossible.
His score rose above 90%. He joined again later, focused on refining attentional skills and improving lab communication. His score remained stable at >70%: evidence, not of perfection, but of integration.
Alex’s arc is proof that with time, structure, and repetition, researchers don’t just cope. They change.
The Bigger Picture: Spaced Repetition as a Path to Institutional Impact
This isn’t about memory tricks. It’s about designing learning that respects the complexity of human cognition and behaviour. When we embed strategies like spaced repetition into training for researchers, we empower them to do more than cope. We enable them to grow.
That’s why over 85% of our participants complete our training with full certification, not just bums-on-seats attendance. That means completing weekly assignments, showing up, and finishing strong. And 95% of participants show statistically significant improvements in their behaviour from managing projects to emotional regulation.
These aren’t surface-level stats. They reflect a more profound shift. Our trainings aren’t just well-attended, they’re transformative because they’re built like good research: hypothesis-driven, data-informed, and iterative.
Institutions don’t need more noise. They need trainings that move the needle in measurable ways. Spaced repetition is one piece of that system, a critical one.
Let’s Support Your Researchers With Learning That Lasts
We offer the classical short-form formats, including one- or two-day workshops, which raise awareness, spark meaningful conversations, and share tools. They serve a purpose. However, where our work truly makes an impact is in our long-form training formats, which last 7-9 weeks and have been designed to deliver sustainable behavioural change.
Fast Forward is our seven-week training that helps early-stage researchers take control of their personal productivity and project management. Resilience Training for Researchers spans nine weeks, covering topics such as stress, attention, mindset, and communication. Both are grounded in evidence-based frameworks, and both embed spaced repetition throughout.
If you’re looking to support the researchers in your organisation meaningfully, and you’re ready to move from well-meaning interventions to training that sticks, book a 20-minute call with me, Nadine.
We’ll talk about your context and explore what would genuinely move the needle for your researchers.
[Book a call →]References
Ebbinghaus, H. (1885/1913). Memory: A Contribution to Experimental Psychology (H. A. Ruger & C. E. Bussenius, Trans.). Teachers College, Columbia University. (Original work published 1885)
Mery, F., & Kawecki, T. J. (2002). Experimental evolution of learning ability in fruit flies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(22), 14274–14279. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.222371199
Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 354–380. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.354
Kornell, N., Castel, A. D., Eich, T. S., & Bjork, R. A. (2010). Spacing as the friend of both memory and induction in young and older adults. Psychology and Aging, 25(2), 498–503. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017807
Dr. Nadine Sinclair
Nadine is a trusted advisor to corporate and academic leaders and one of the Managing Directors of Mind Matters. Before embarking on her entrepreneurial journey, she was a project manager with McKinsey & Company. A scientist by training and at heart, she conducted her doctoral research at the Max Planck Institute for Biophysical Chemistry. Nadine brings close to 30,000 hours of experience in managing projects for research institutions, research foundations, pharmaceutical and biotech companies (including many Fortune 500) and governments. She continues to build her expertise with over 1,000 hours of project management each year. As a neuro leadership expert, she bridges the gap between science and business practices, leveraging the latest insights from neuroscience and behavioural economics to create breakthroughs for her clients.
