The ability to learn cause-effect relations from experience is critical for humans to behave adaptively -- to choose causes that bring about desired effects. However, traditional experiments on experience-based learning involve events that are artificially compressed in time so that all learning occurs over the course of minutes. These paradigms therefore exclusively rely upon working memory. In contrast, in real-world situations we need to be able to learn cause-effect relations over days and weeks, which necessitates long-term memory. 413 participants completed a smartphone study, which compared learning a cause-effect relation one trial per day for 24 days versus the traditional paradigm of 24 trials back-to-back. Surprisingly, we found few differences between the short versus long timeframes. Subjects were able to accurately detect generative and preventive causal relations, and they exhibited illusory correlations in both the short and long timeframe tasks. These results provide initial evidence that experience-based learning over long timeframes exhibits similar strengths and weaknesses as in short timeframes. However, learning over long timeframes may become more impaired with more complex tasks.