The present study explored the study habits and strategies of 469 college undergraduates and their impact on GPA. Study habits that positively correlated with higher GPAs included planning one’s study schedule in advance, studying in the morning, and spacing out study sessions. Self-testing was the only reliable study strategy that was positively correlated with GPA; cramming the night before an exam was negatively correlated with GPA. To assess whether study habits and strategies varied across student groups, Latent Profile Analysis was used to identify distinct subgroups. The three groups of learners differed in age, non-traditional student characteristics, and course modality preferences. Younger, moderately nontraditional, online-oriented students were more likely to plan their study schedule. Older, nontraditional students who prefer online learning were less likely to study with their friends. Overall, the present high-powered study of diverse college students demonstrates that learning behaviors vary by student characteristics and are related to grades. Accordingly, instructors must understand their students’ needs to provide effective support for their students.
AdesopeO. O.TrevisanD. A.SundararajanN. (2017). Rethinking the use of tests: A meta-analysis of practice testing. Review of Educational Research, 87(3), 659–701. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316689306
2.
AgarwalP. K.NunesL. D.BluntJ. R. (2021). Retrieval practice consistently benefits student learning: A systematic review of applied research in schools and classrooms. Educational Psychology Review, 33(4), 1409–1453. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09595-9
3.
ArielyD.WertenbrochK. (2002). Procrastination, deadlines, and performance: Self-control by precommitment. s(3), 219–224. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00441
BerroM. A.OttL.GarlandA.EvansM.HoganK. A.PlumleyR. D.KuhlmannS. L.YuL.BernackiM. L.GreeneJ. A. (2025). Design matters: Students’ adherence to high-structure course design activities predicts their academic success. Journal of Educational Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000970
6.
BettingerE. P.FoxL.LoebS.TaylorE. S. (2017). Virtual classrooms: How online college courses affect student success. American Economic Review, 107(9), 2855–2875. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20151193
7.
ButlerA. C.RoedigerH. L. (2008). Feedback enhances the positive effects and reduces the negative effects of multiple-choice testing. Memory & Cognition, 36, 604–616. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.36.3.604
8.
CarpenterS. K.CepedaN. J.RohrerD.KangS. H. K.PashlerH. (2012). Using spacing to enhance diverse forms of learning: Review of recent research and implications for instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 24(3), 369–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-012-9205-z
9.
CarpenterS. K.PanS. C.ButlerA. C. (2022). The science of effective learning with spacing and retrieval practice. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1(9), 496–511. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-022-00089-1
10.
ChanJ. C. K.MeissnerC. A.DavisS. D. (2018). Retrieval potentiates new learning: A theoretical and meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 144(11), 1111–1146. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000166
11.
ChoK. W. (2019). Exploring the dark side of exposure to peer excellence among traditional and nontraditional college students. Learning and Individual Differences, 73, 52–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2019.05.001
12.
ChoK. W.JohnsonK. (2025). Using retrieval practice to remediate boredom and multitasking in learning. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 37(8) 832–839. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2025.2539286
13.
ChoK. W.KongoD. (2024). The relations among math anxiety, math self-construct, and math achievement in older and underserved minority students. Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 72(2), 204–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/07377363.2023.2218580
14.
ChoK. W.NeelyJ. H.CroccoS.VitranoD. (2017). Testing enhances both encoding and retrieval for both tested and untested items. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(7), 1211–1235. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2016.1175485
15.
ChoK. W.PowersA. (2019). Testing enhances both memorization and conceptual learning of categorical materials. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 8(2) 166–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2019.01.003
16.
ChoK. W.SerranoD. M. (2020). Noncognitive predictors of academic achievement among nontraditional and traditional ethnically diverse college students. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 68(3), 190–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/07377363.2020.1776557
17.
ChoyS. (2002). Nontraditional undergraduates: Findings from the condition of education 2002 (NCES 2002-012). National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED546117.pdf
18.
DennisC. A.CliftonG. (2021). Adult postgraduate students’ learning in online spaces—Images of identity and belonging. Zeitschrift für Weiterbildungsforschung, 44(2), 133–150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40955-021-00187-2
19.
ForbusP.NewboldJ. J.MehtaS. S. (2011). A study of non-traditional and traditional students in terms of their time management behaviors, stress factors, and coping strategies. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 15, 109–125.
20.
GellerJ.ToftnessA. R.ArmstrongP. I.CarpenterS. K.ManzC. L.CoffmanC. R.LammM. H. (2018). Study strategies and beliefs about learning as a function of academic achievement and achievement goals. Memory, 26(5), 683–690. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2017.1397175
21.
GopalanM.BradyS. T. (2020). College students’ sense of belonging: A national perspective. Educational Researcher, 49(2), 134–137. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X19897622
22.
GrabowskiC.RushM.RagenK.FayardV.Watkins-LewisK. (2016). Today’s non-traditional student: Challenges to academic success and degree completion. Inquiries Journal, 8(3) 1–2.
23.
HaffordC. (2009). Sibling caretaking in immigrant families: Understanding cultural practices to inform child welfare practice and evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 33(3), 294–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2009.05.003
24.
HartwigM. K.DunloskyJ. (2012). Study strategies of college students: Are self-testing and scheduling related to achievement?Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(1), 126–134. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-011-0181-y
KornellN.BjorkR.A. (2007). The promise and perils of self-regulated study. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review14, 219–224. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194055
27.
ManjareekaM.DasguptaS.KanungoP.DasR. C. (2025). Perceived stress and academic achievement among medical students with different chronotypes: A cross sectional study on first year medical students from India. BMC Medical Education, 25(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-07281-w
28.
MasynK. E. (2013). Latent class analysis and finite mixture modeling. In LittleT. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of quantitative methods (Vol. 2, pp. 551–611). Oxford University Press.
29.
McDanielM. A.EinsteinG. O. (2020). Training learning strategies to promote self-regulation and transfer: The knowledge, belief, commitment, and planning framework. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(6), 1363–1381. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620920723
MorganG. B. (2015). Mixed mode latent class analysis: An examination of fit index performance for classification. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 22(1), 76–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.935751
NeelyJ. H.ChoK. W. (2014). Testing and retrieval practice effects: Assessing the contributions of encoding and retrieval mechanisms. In LindsayD. S.KelleyC. M.YonelinasA. P.Roediger, IIIH. L. (Eds.), Remembering: Attributions, processes, and control in human memory: Papers in honour of Larry L. Jacoby (pp. 29–45). Psychology Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2014-56350-003
34.
NylundK. L.AsparouhovT.MuthenB. O. (2007). Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: A Monte Carlo simulation study. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(4), 535–569. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701575396
35.
PanS. C.RickardT. C. (2018). Transfer of test-enhanced learning: Meta-analytic review and synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 144(7), 710–756. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000151
36.
PaulsenJ.McCormickA. C. (2020). Reassessing disparities in online learner student engagement in higher education. Educational Researcher, 49(1), 20–29. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X19898690
37.
PetersenK. J.QualterP.HumphreyN. (2019). The application of latent class analysis for investigating population child mental health: A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1214. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01214
38.
PreckelF.LipnevichA. A.SchneiderS.RobertsR. D. (2011). Chronotype, cognitive abilities, and academic achievement: A meta-analytic investigation. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(5), 483–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.07.003
39.
PutnamA. L.SungkhasetteeV. W.RoedigerH. L.III. (2016). Optimizing learning in college: Tips from cognitive psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(5), 652–660. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616645770
40.
RadfordA. W.CominoleM.SkomsvoldP. (2015). Demographic and enrollment characteristics of nontraditional undergraduates: 2011–12. National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2015/2015025.pdf.
41.
RamN.GrimmK. J. (2009). Methods and measures: Growth mixture modeling: A method for identifying differences in longitudinal change among unobserved groups. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 33(6), 565–576. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025409343765
42.
RegaladoM.SmaleM. A. (2015). “I am more productive in the library because it’s quiet”: Commuter students in the college library. College & Research Libraries, 76(7), 899–913. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.76.7.899
43.
SchneiderM.PreckelF. (2017). Variables associated with achievement in higher education: A systematic review of meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 143(6), 565–600. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000098.
44.
SinhaT.KapurM. (2021). When problem solving followed by instruction works: Evidence for productive failure. Review of Educational Research, 91(5), 761–798. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211019105
45.
StanleyL.KellermannsF. W.ZellwegerT. M. (2017). Latent profile analysis: Understanding family firm profiles. Family Business Review, 30(1), 84–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894486516677426
46.
StansburyJ. A.EarnestD. R. (2025). Leveling up learning: Exploring meaningful gamification in psychology courses. Teaching of Psychology, 52(2), 230–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283241228878
47.
XieJ.ChoK. W.WeiT.XuJ.FanM. (2025). The effects of academic emotions on learning outcomes: A three-level meta-analysis of research conducted between 2000-2024. Learning and Motivation, 90, 102109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2025.102109
48.
XuD.JaggarsS. S. (2014). Performance gaps between online and face-to-face courses: Differences across types of students and academic subject areas. The Journal of Higher Education, 85(5), 633–659. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2014.11777343
49.
YanV. X.ThaiK. P.BjorkR. A. (2014). Habits and beliefs that guide self-regulated learning: Do they vary with mindset?Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 3(3), 140–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2014.04.003
50.
YangC.LuoL.VadilloM. A.YuR.ShanksD. R. (2021). Testing (quizzing) boosts classroom learning: A systematic and meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 147(4), 399–435. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000309
51.
YangX.ZhaoX.TianX.XingB. (2020). Effects of environment and posture on the concentration and achievement of students in mobile learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(3), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1707692
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
