Thanks for this thoughtful feedback! You've identified exactly the trade-off we tried to balance when designing the frequency options.
How the Review Frequency Works
The setting controls the base multiplier for the spaced repetition algorithm. After each successful review, the interval until the next review grows exponentially based on your mastery level:
Interval = frequencylevel - 1 days
Here's how all the current options compare:
| Level | Very Often (1.25) | Often (1.5) | Normal (2.0) | Rarely (2.5) | Very Rarely (3.0) |
| 1 | 1 day | 1 day | 1 day | 1 day | 1 day |
| 2 | 1 day | 1 day | 2 days | 2 days | 3 days |
| 3 | 1 day | 2 days | 4 days | 6 days | 9 days |
| 4 | 1 day | 3 days | 8 days | 15 days | 27 days |
| 5 | 2 days | 5 days | 16 days | 39 days | 81 days |
| 6 | 3 days | 7 days | 32 days | 97 days | 243 days |
| 7 | 3 days | 11 days | 64 days | 244 days | 729 days |
| 8 | 4 days | 17 days | 128 days | 610 days | 999 days (max) |
Suggested Middle Ground: 1.75
A frequency value of 1.75 would give you the "best of both worlds" you're describing:
| Level | Often (1.5) | 1.75 | Normal (2.0) |
| 1 | 1 day | 1 day | 1 day |
| 2 | 1 day | 1 day | 2 days |
| 3 | 2 days | 3 days | 4 days |
| 4 | 3 days | 5 days | 8 days |
| 5 | 5 days | 9 days | 16 days |
| 6 | 7 days | 16 days | 32 days |
| 7 | 11 days | 28 days | 64 days |
| 8 | 17 days | 49 days | 128 days |
With 1.75, you'd get:
- Tighter early reviews (levels 1-4): verses stay fresh during the critical learning phase
- Reasonable later gaps (levels 5+): once you've proven mastery, you won't be overwhelmed
What do you think?
Would adding 1.75 as a new option work for your use case? Some possible labels:
- Fairly Often - clear and fits the existing naming pattern
- Regularly - simple and intuitive
- Steadily - implies consistent reinforcement
Or would you prefer a custom slider where you could dial in any value between 1.25 and 3.0?
Let us know your thoughts!