Domain-specific prior knowledge and learning: A meta-analysis

IF 14.3 1区 心理学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Educational Psychologist Pub Date : 2021-07-23 DOI:10.1080/00461520.2021.1939700
Bianca A. Simonsmeier, Maja Flaig, Anne Deiglmayr, L. Schalk, Michael Schneider
{"title":"Domain-specific prior knowledge and learning: A meta-analysis","authors":"Bianca A. Simonsmeier, Maja Flaig, Anne Deiglmayr, L. Schalk, Michael Schneider","doi":"10.1080/00461520.2021.1939700","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract It is often hypothesized that prior knowledge strongly predicts learning performance. It can affect learning positively mediated through some processes and negatively mediated through others. We examined the relation between prior knowledge and learning in a meta-analysis of 8776 effect sizes. The stability of individual differences, that is, the correlation between pretest and posttest knowledge, was high (r P + = .534). The predictive power of prior knowledge for learning, i.e., the correlation between pretest knowledge and normalized knowledge gains, was low (r NG + = −.059), almost normally distributed, and had a large 95% prediction interval [–.688, .621]. This strong variability falsifies general statements such as “knowledge is power” as well as “the effect of prior knowledge is negligible.” It calls for systematic research on the conditions under which prior knowledge has positive, negative, or negligible effects on learning. This requires more experiments on the processes mediating the effects of prior knowledge and thresholds for useful levels of prior knowledge.","PeriodicalId":48361,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychologist","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":14.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"63","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Psychologist","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2021.1939700","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 63

Abstract

Abstract It is often hypothesized that prior knowledge strongly predicts learning performance. It can affect learning positively mediated through some processes and negatively mediated through others. We examined the relation between prior knowledge and learning in a meta-analysis of 8776 effect sizes. The stability of individual differences, that is, the correlation between pretest and posttest knowledge, was high (r P + = .534). The predictive power of prior knowledge for learning, i.e., the correlation between pretest knowledge and normalized knowledge gains, was low (r NG + = −.059), almost normally distributed, and had a large 95% prediction interval [–.688, .621]. This strong variability falsifies general statements such as “knowledge is power” as well as “the effect of prior knowledge is negligible.” It calls for systematic research on the conditions under which prior knowledge has positive, negative, or negligible effects on learning. This requires more experiments on the processes mediating the effects of prior knowledge and thresholds for useful levels of prior knowledge.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
特定领域的先验知识和学习:一项元分析
摘要人们经常假设先验知识对学习表现有很强的预测作用。它可以通过一些过程积极地影响学习,也可以通过另一些过程消极地影响学习。我们在一项包含8776个效应量的元分析中检验了先验知识与学习之间的关系。个体差异的稳定性,即测前知识与测后知识的相关性较高(r P + = .534)。先验知识对学习的预测能力,即预试知识与归一化知识增益之间的相关性较低(r NG + = - 0.059),几乎为正态分布,并且具有较大的95%预测区间[-]。688年,.621]。这种强烈的可变性否定了诸如“知识就是力量”以及“先验知识的影响可以忽略不计”之类的一般陈述。它要求系统地研究在哪些条件下,先验知识对学习有积极、消极或可忽略的影响。这需要在先验知识和先验知识有用水平阈值的中介过程上进行更多的实验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
19.10
自引率
3.40%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: The Educational Psychologist is a scholarly journal dedicated to exploring the psychology of learning and instruction. Articles in this journal encompass a diverse range of perspectives, from examining psychological mechanisms to exploring social and societal phenomena related to learning and instruction. The journal publishes theoretical and conceptual articles, as well as reviews and meta-analyses, that significantly contribute to theory or advance the methods used to explore educational psychology. Emphasizing innovation and advancing understanding, the journal does not publish articles solely reporting the methods and results of empirical studies; instead, all submissions, including reviews and meta-analyses, must offer clear implications for advancing theory. In addition to regular articles, the journal features special issues that delve into important themes in educational psychology, along with focal articles accompanied by peer commentary.
期刊最新文献
In defence of psychometric measurement: a systematic review of contemporary self-report feedback inventories The model of threat-infused intergroup feedback: Why, when, and how feedback to ethnic minority learners is positively biased Self-regulatory processes within and between diverse goals: The multiple goals regulation framework Racisms of commission and omission in educational psychology: A historical analysis and systematic review What is the role of race in educational psychology? A review of research in Educational Psychologist
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1