Learning and Individual Differences最新文献_第3页

AI tools for systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses in educational psychology: An overview and a practical guide 教育心理学中用于系统文献综述和元分析的人工智能工具：概述和实用指南

IF 9 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL

Learning and Individual Differences

Pub Date : 2025-12-09 DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102849

Tim Fütterer , Diego G. Campos , Thomas Gfrörer , Rosa Lavelle-Hill , Kou Murayama , Ronny Scherer

The rapid growth of research literature has made systematic reviews and meta-analyses increasingly time-consuming, limiting their utility in fast-evolving fields such as educational psychology. Artificial intelligence (AI) tools have enormous potential to streamline these processes, yet their adoption remains limited due to usability issues and a lack of systematic guidance. Out of 282 tools that we compiled from overviews that listed AI tools for research syntheses, we filtered a subset of 7 AI tools that met quality standards, such as transparency and accessibility. These tools were evaluated for their potential to support systematic reviews and meta-analyses in educational psychology. Our review highlights the tools' strengths, limitations, and ethical considerations for their responsible use by providing practical guidance and coding information.

Educational relevance statement

This research identifies and evaluates AI tools that streamline systematic reviews and meta-analyses, addressing critical challenges in synthesizing educational psychology research. By making these processes more efficient, accessible, and accurate, the study empowers educators and researchers to derive timely insights into diverse learner needs. Practically, the findings guide the adoption of AI tools that reduce workload and cognitive bias, enabling more evidence-based and inclusive educational practices. This work supports the advancement of scientifically rigorous methods that enhance understanding of individual differences in learning, directly contributing to improved educational interventions and outcomes.

研究文献的快速增长使得系统综述和元分析越来越耗时，限制了它们在教育心理学等快速发展领域的应用。人工智能（AI）工具在简化这些流程方面具有巨大的潜力，但由于可用性问题和缺乏系统指导，它们的采用仍然有限。在我们从列出用于研究综合的人工智能工具的概述中编译的282个工具中，我们筛选出了符合质量标准的7个人工智能工具的子集，例如透明度和可访问性。对这些工具进行了评估，以支持教育心理学的系统评价和元分析。我们的评论通过提供实用的指导和编码信息，强调了这些工具的优势、局限性，以及对它们负责任使用的道德考虑。教育相关性声明本研究确定并评估了简化系统评论和元分析的人工智能工具，解决了综合教育心理学研究中的关键挑战。通过使这些过程更有效、更容易获得和更准确，该研究使教育工作者和研究人员能够及时获得对不同学习者需求的见解。实际上，研究结果指导采用人工智能工具，减少工作量和认知偏见，实现更多以证据为基础和包容性的教育实践。这项工作支持了科学严谨方法的进步，这些方法增强了对学习个体差异的理解，直接有助于改善教育干预和结果。

{"title":"AI tools for systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses in educational psychology: An overview and a practical guide","authors":"Tim Fütterer , Diego G. Campos , Thomas Gfrörer , Rosa Lavelle-Hill , Kou Murayama , Ronny Scherer","doi":"10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102849","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102849","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The rapid growth of research literature has made systematic reviews and meta-analyses increasingly time-consuming, limiting their utility in fast-evolving fields such as educational psychology. Artificial intelligence (AI) tools have enormous potential to streamline these processes, yet their adoption remains limited due to usability issues and a lack of systematic guidance. Out of 282 tools that we compiled from overviews that listed AI tools for research syntheses, we filtered a subset of 7 AI tools that met quality standards, such as transparency and accessibility. These tools were evaluated for their potential to support systematic reviews and meta-analyses in educational psychology. Our review highlights the tools' strengths, limitations, and ethical considerations for their responsible use by providing practical guidance and coding information.</div></div><div><h3>Educational relevance statement</h3><div>This research identifies and evaluates AI tools that streamline systematic reviews and meta-analyses, addressing critical challenges in synthesizing educational psychology research. By making these processes more efficient, accessible, and accurate, the study empowers educators and researchers to derive timely insights into diverse learner needs. Practically, the findings guide the adoption of AI tools that reduce workload and cognitive bias, enabling more evidence-based and inclusive educational practices. This work supports the advancement of scientifically rigorous methods that enhance understanding of individual differences in learning, directly contributing to improved educational interventions and outcomes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48336,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Individual Differences","volume":"126 ","pages":"Article 102849"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0,"publicationDate":"2025-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145738318","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The winner takes it all – Effects of leaderboard-based feedback on cognitive performance and motivation 胜者通吃——基于排行榜的反馈对认知表现和动机的影响

IF 9 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL

Learning and Individual Differences

Pub Date : 2025-12-09 DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102836

Amadeus J. Pickal , Matthias Stadler , Michael Sailer , Shurui Bai , Manuel Ninaus , Samuel Greiff , Nicolas Becker , Marco Koch

Leaderboards are frequently used in gamified learning; however, results from previous studies on the topic often turn out to be inconsistent. A reason might be the adaptive nature of leaderboards that provide different feedback regarding positions and trends over time. In this study, we systematically manipulated leaderboard-based feedback and investigated its effects on cognitive performance and intrinsic motivation. N = 427 participants were randomly assigned to one of five leaderboard conditions, which differed regarding the received fictitious feedback on initial position (higher/lower) and trend (upward/downward), plus a control condition without feedback. We found small but not substantial group differences in performance over time. However, we did find group differences in intrinsic motivation (highest motivation for higher position with upward trend leaderboard-based feedback). Exploratory analyses suggested no moderating effects of individual characteristics in learners' achievement motives. Results emphasize the need to consider the adaptive nature of leaderboards in research and practice.

Education relevance statement

The study results show that leaderboard-based feedback can affect learners' intrinsic motivation. It appears especially motivating for learners to see themselves in higher positions and/or shifting upwards on a leaderboard. This is even the case when the feedback is fictitious and not based on actual performance. Additionally, results show that negative feedback can be more detrimental than no feedback at all. These results also have practical and educational implications, underlining the importance of considering how to frame leaderboard-based feedback for learners, depending on their performance, and that leaderboard-based feedback should be used with caution.

排行榜经常用于游戏化学习；然而，以往关于这一主题的研究结果往往不一致。原因之一可能是积分排行榜的适应性，它会随着时间的推移提供不同的位置和趋势反馈。在这项研究中，我们系统地操纵基于排行榜的反馈，并调查其对认知表现和内在动机的影响。N = 427名参与者被随机分配到五种排行榜条件中的一种，这些条件的不同在于收到了关于初始位置（更高/更低）和趋势（上升/下降）的虚构反馈，以及没有反馈的控制条件。随着时间的推移，我们发现各组的表现差异不大，但并不显著。然而，我们确实发现了群体内在动机的差异（游戏邦注：最高动机是获得更高的职位，基于排行榜的反馈呈上升趋势）。探索性分析表明，个体特征对学习者的成就动机没有调节作用。研究结果强调了在研究和实践中考虑排行榜适应性的必要性。教育相关性声明研究结果表明，基于排行榜的反馈可以影响学习者的内在动机。对于学习者来说，看到自己处于更高的位置和/或在排行榜上上升似乎特别有激励作用。甚至当反馈是虚构的而不是基于实际表现时也是如此。此外，研究结果表明，负面反馈比没有反馈更有害。这些结果也具有实际意义和教育意义，强调了考虑如何根据学习者的表现为他们构建基于排行榜的反馈的重要性，并且应该谨慎使用基于排行榜的反馈。

{"title":"The winner takes it all – Effects of leaderboard-based feedback on cognitive performance and motivation","authors":"Amadeus J. Pickal , Matthias Stadler , Michael Sailer , Shurui Bai , Manuel Ninaus , Samuel Greiff , Nicolas Becker , Marco Koch","doi":"10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102836","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102836","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Leaderboards are frequently used in gamified learning; however, results from previous studies on the topic often turn out to be inconsistent. A reason might be the adaptive nature of leaderboards that provide different feedback regarding positions and trends over time. In this study, we systematically manipulated leaderboard-based feedback and investigated its effects on cognitive performance and intrinsic motivation. <em>N</em> = 427 participants were randomly assigned to one of five leaderboard conditions, which differed regarding the received fictitious feedback on initial position (higher/lower) and trend (upward/downward), plus a control condition without feedback. We found small but not substantial group differences in performance over time. However, we did find group differences in intrinsic motivation (highest motivation for higher position with upward trend leaderboard-based feedback). Exploratory analyses suggested no moderating effects of individual characteristics in learners' achievement motives. Results emphasize the need to consider the adaptive nature of leaderboards in research and practice.</div></div><div><h3>Education relevance statement</h3><div>The study results show that leaderboard-based feedback can affect learners' intrinsic motivation. It appears especially motivating for learners to see themselves in higher positions and/or shifting upwards on a leaderboard. This is even the case when the feedback is fictitious and not based on actual performance. Additionally, results show that negative feedback can be more detrimental than no feedback at all. These results also have practical and educational implications, underlining the importance of considering how to frame leaderboard-based feedback for learners, depending on their performance, and that leaderboard-based feedback should be used with caution.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48336,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Individual Differences","volume":"126 ","pages":"Article 102836"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0,"publicationDate":"2025-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145738317","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Why do some students stay engaged? The longitudinal impact of personal growth initiative and future work self 为什么有些学生会一直参与？个人成长主动性与未来工作自我的纵向影响

IF 9 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL

Learning and Individual Differences

Pub Date : 2025-12-08 DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102848

Xin Zhang , Xin Tang , Zijian Tang , Jia Zhang , Xingyi Li , Yutong Liu

Learning engagement (LE) is key to academic and career outcomes, yet intrinsic factors like personal growth initiative (PGI) and its potential reciprocal links with future work self (FWS) remain understudied due to reliance on cross-sectional research. This study examines their longitudinal relationships using a three-wave RI-CLPM with 868 high school students from Guangdong, Zhejiang, and Shandong Provinces, China. Results indicated that PGI predicts subsequent LE and FWS primarily in later developmental stages (T₂–T₃). FWS and LE exhibited stable bidirectional associations, demonstrating that career clarity and academic engagement mutually reinforce each other. However, LE and FWS did not significantly predict PGI. These findings highlight the time-sensitive, asymmetrical dynamics among PGI, FWS, and LE. PGI acts as a later-stage precursor for LE and FWS, while LE and FWS form a stable bidirectional loop. The results underscore the need to foster students' proactive skills and future-oriented career planning to support sustained engagement.

学习参与（LE）是学术和职业成果的关键，但由于依赖于横断面研究，个人成长主动性（PGI）及其与未来工作自我（FWS）的潜在互惠关系等内在因素仍未得到充分研究。本研究以广东、浙江、山东三省的868名高中生为研究对象，采用三波i - clpm来检验其纵向关系。结果表明，PGI主要在发育后期（T2-T3）预测随后的LE和FWS。FWS和LE表现出稳定的双向关联，表明职业清晰度和学术投入是相互促进的。然而，LE和FWS对PGI没有显著的预测作用。这些发现强调了PGI、FWS和LE之间的时间敏感性和不对称动力学。PGI是LE和FWS的后期前体，而LE和FWS形成一个稳定的双向回路。调查结果强调，需要培养学生的主动技能和面向未来的职业规划，以支持持续的参与。

{"title":"Why do some students stay engaged? The longitudinal impact of personal growth initiative and future work self","authors":"Xin Zhang , Xin Tang , Zijian Tang , Jia Zhang , Xingyi Li , Yutong Liu","doi":"10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102848","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102848","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Learning engagement (LE) is key to academic and career outcomes, yet intrinsic factors like personal growth initiative (PGI) and its potential reciprocal links with future work self (FWS) remain understudied due to reliance on cross-sectional research. This study examines their longitudinal relationships using a three-wave RI-CLPM with 868 high school students from Guangdong, Zhejiang, and Shandong Provinces, China. Results indicated that PGI predicts subsequent LE and FWS primarily in later developmental stages (T<sub>2</sub>–T<sub>3</sub>). FWS and LE exhibited stable bidirectional associations, demonstrating that career clarity and academic engagement mutually reinforce each other. However, LE and FWS did not significantly predict PGI. These findings highlight the time-sensitive, asymmetrical dynamics among PGI, FWS, and LE. PGI acts as a later-stage precursor for LE and FWS, while LE and FWS form a stable bidirectional loop. The results underscore the need to foster students' proactive skills and future-oriented career planning to support sustained engagement.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48336,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Individual Differences","volume":"126 ","pages":"Article 102848"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0,"publicationDate":"2025-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145694917","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Gender-segregated trajectories to a university major and career-related motivation 性别隔离的大学专业轨迹和职业相关动机

IF 9 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL

Learning and Individual Differences

Pub Date : 2025-12-07 DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102847

Jeffrey M. DeVries, Jacquelynne S. Eccles, Richard Arum

Women enroll in many university majors at a lower rate than men, which relates to inequities in many future career fields. To understand such disparities, we identified heterogeneous trajectories through which students change their majors in terms of the majors' gender ratios. Through the lens of situated expectancy-value theory, we examined changes in task value related to each trajectory. Trajectories were identified across all students from 2017 to 2020 (N = 23,328), a subset of whom (n = 2380) participated in surveys regarding their self-rated career aptitude and desired career attributes. We identified five trajectories of major enrollment in terms of gender ratio: stable-female, stable-male, stable-neutral, male-to-female, and female-to-neutral. Gender disparities were common across both STEM and non-STEM majors. Students on the male-to-female trajectory were much more likely to have a drop in their self-rated science aptitude and an increase in their desire for prosocial opportunities in their subsequent careers.

女性在许多大学专业的入学率低于男性，这与许多未来职业领域的不平等有关。为了理解这种差异，我们确定了学生在专业性别比例方面改变专业的异质轨迹。通过定位期望值理论的镜头，我们检查了与每个轨迹相关的任务值的变化。从2017年到2020年，我们确定了所有学生（N = 23328）的轨迹，其中一部分学生（N = 2380）参加了关于他们自我评估的职业能力和期望的职业属性的调查。我们在性别比例方面确定了五种专业入学轨迹：稳定的女性，稳定的男性，稳定的中性，男性对女性和女性对中性。性别差异在STEM和非STEM专业中都很普遍。男女同组的学生更有可能在科学能力的自我评价上有所下降，而在随后的职业生涯中，他们对亲社会机会的渴望却有所增加。

{"title":"Gender-segregated trajectories to a university major and career-related motivation","authors":"Jeffrey M. DeVries, Jacquelynne S. Eccles, Richard Arum","doi":"10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102847","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102847","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Women enroll in many university majors at a lower rate than men, which relates to inequities in many future career fields. To understand such disparities, we identified heterogeneous trajectories through which students change their majors in terms of the majors' gender ratios. Through the lens of situated expectancy-value theory, we examined changes in task value related to each trajectory. Trajectories were identified across all students from 2017 to 2020 (<em>N</em> = 23,328), a subset of whom (<em>n</em> = 2380) participated in surveys regarding their self-rated career aptitude and desired career attributes. We identified five trajectories of major enrollment in terms of gender ratio: <em>stable-female</em>, <em>stable-male</em>, <em>stable-neutral</em>, <em>male-to-female</em>, and <em>female-to-neutral</em>. Gender disparities were common across both STEM and non-STEM majors. Students on the <em>male-to-female</em> trajectory were much more likely to have a drop in their self-rated science aptitude and an increase in their desire for prosocial opportunities in their subsequent careers.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48336,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Individual Differences","volume":"126 ","pages":"Article 102847"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0,"publicationDate":"2025-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145694958","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Discrepancies between parent- and child-report internalizing problems in specific learning disabilities 父母和孩子之间的差异报告了特定学习障碍的内化问题

IF 9 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL

Learning and Individual Differences

Pub Date : 2025-12-03 DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102845

Ambra Gentile, Giulia Giordano, Cristiano Inguglia, Sonia Ingoglia, Marianna Alesi

Internalizing problems in children with Specific Learning Disabilities (SpLD) are barely assessed in scientific literature. In the current study, we used the multiple informant technique to detect differences between the evaluation of mothers, fathers and self (the child). The study sample, consisting of 97 families (children, mothers and fathers), with 47 children previously diagnosed for a Specific Learning Disability (SpLD), completed standardized measures for internalizing problems. Children with SpLD resulted to be more depressed and anxious than typically developing (TD) peers. Moreover, mothers of TD children perceived children as more anxious as children themselves or their fathers perceive them, while no significant differences between Informants were found for children with SpLD. Finally, parents' reports were positively related to each other for children with TD but not for children with SpLD. These results can be used as a starting point for psychological empowering interventions for students with SpLD and their families.

Educational relevance statement

The current study found that children who have a specific learning disability tend to suffer more from internalizing problems (i.e., anxiety, depression) than typically developed peers. Moreover, mothers perceive more anxiety in their children than the one reported by children themselves. These results underline the need for a psychological empowerment in children with SpLD.

特殊学习障碍儿童的内化问题在科学文献中很少得到评估。在本研究中，我们使用多重信息提供者技术来检测母亲、父亲和自我（孩子）评价之间的差异。研究样本由97个家庭（儿童、母亲和父亲）组成，其中47个儿童先前被诊断为特殊学习障碍（SpLD），完成了内化问题的标准化测量。患有SpLD的儿童比正常发育的同龄人更容易抑郁和焦虑。此外，自闭症儿童的母亲认为孩子比孩子自己或他们的父亲更焦虑，而自闭症儿童的被调查者之间没有发现显著差异。最后，父母的报告在TD儿童中呈显著正相关，而在SpLD儿童中则无显著正相关。这些结果可以作为SpLD学生及其家庭心理赋权干预的起点。教育相关性陈述目前的研究发现，有特殊学习障碍的儿童往往比正常发育的同龄人更容易受到内化问题（即焦虑、抑郁）的困扰。此外，母亲感受到的孩子的焦虑比孩子自己报告的要多。这些结果强调了对SpLD儿童进行心理赋权的必要性。

{"title":"Discrepancies between parent- and child-report internalizing problems in specific learning disabilities","authors":"Ambra Gentile, Giulia Giordano, Cristiano Inguglia, Sonia Ingoglia, Marianna Alesi","doi":"10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102845","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102845","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Internalizing problems in children with Specific Learning Disabilities (SpLD) are barely assessed in scientific literature. In the current study, we used the multiple informant technique to detect differences between the evaluation of mothers, fathers and self (the child). The study sample, consisting of 97 families (children, mothers and fathers), with 47 children previously diagnosed for a Specific Learning Disability (SpLD), completed standardized measures for internalizing problems. Children with SpLD resulted to be more depressed and anxious than typically developing (TD) peers. Moreover, mothers of TD children perceived children as more anxious as children themselves or their fathers perceive them, while no significant differences between Informants were found for children with SpLD. Finally, parents' reports were positively related to each other for children with TD but not for children with SpLD. These results can be used as a starting point for psychological empowering interventions for students with SpLD and their families.</div></div><div><h3>Educational relevance statement</h3><div>The current study found that children who have a specific learning disability tend to suffer more from internalizing problems (i.e., anxiety, depression) than typically developed peers. Moreover, mothers perceive more anxiety in their children than the one reported by children themselves. These results underline the need for a psychological empowerment in children with SpLD.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48336,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Individual Differences","volume":"125 ","pages":"Article 102845"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0,"publicationDate":"2025-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145684825","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Shaping the socio-emotional landscape: Advances, mechanisms, and contexts in learning and individual differences 塑造社会情感景观：学习和个体差异的进展、机制和背景

IF 9 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL

Learning and Individual Differences

Pub Date : 2025-11-30 DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102844

Jiesi Guo , Samuel Greiff , Xin Tang

引用次数: 0

Identifying individual cognitive and motivational profiles predictive of academic growth: A combined machine learning and person-centered approach 识别预测学术成长的个人认知和动机概况：结合机器学习和以人为本的方法

IF 9 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL

Learning and Individual Differences

Pub Date : 2025-11-28 DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102835

Dana Miller-Cotto , James P. Byrnes

Identifying malleable predictors of academic achievement is critical for supporting individual differences in learning outcomes and informing targeted interventions. However, practical constraints often require reducing the number of predictors while still accounting for meaningful variance. In this study, we combined two machine learning approaches (ridge regression and lasso regression) with a person-centered technique, latent profile transition analysis (LPTA), to isolate key cognitive and motivational factors that differentiate learners and predict academic growth. Using a large, nationally representative longitudinal dataset, machine learning analyses identified three robust predictors from 14 propensity variables: prior reading skills, motivation, and working memory. Subsequent LPTA revealed five distinct profiles of learners based on different combinations of these variables, with most children remaining in stable profiles across kindergarten and first grade, though some showed upward transitions. Importantly, these profiles transcended socioeconomic status and diagnostic categories, and they significantly predicted growth in mathematics achievement, a skill not used to create the profiles. Findings highlight meaningful and stable individual differences in cognitive and motivational profiles that shape learning trajectories, with implications for theory development, early identification, and the development of tailored intervention strategies.

识别学习成绩的可塑预测因子对于支持学习结果的个体差异和告知有针对性的干预措施至关重要。然而，实际的限制通常需要减少预测因子的数量，同时仍然考虑有意义的方差。在这项研究中，我们将两种机器学习方法（岭回归和lasso回归）与以人为中心的技术——潜在剖面转换分析（LPTA）相结合，分离出区分学习者的关键认知和动机因素，并预测学术成长。使用具有全国代表性的大型纵向数据集，机器学习分析从14个倾向变量中确定了三个可靠的预测因素：先前的阅读技能、动机和工作记忆。随后的LPTA基于这些变量的不同组合揭示了五种不同的学习者概况，大多数孩子在幼儿园和一年级期间保持稳定的概况，尽管有些孩子表现出向上的转变。重要的是，这些概况超越了社会经济地位和诊断类别，它们显著地预测了数学成绩的增长，而数学技能并没有用于创建概况。研究结果强调了塑造学习轨迹的认知和动机概况中有意义和稳定的个体差异，这对理论发展、早期识别和量身定制的干预策略的发展具有重要意义。

{"title":"Identifying individual cognitive and motivational profiles predictive of academic growth: A combined machine learning and person-centered approach","authors":"Dana Miller-Cotto , James P. Byrnes","doi":"10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102835","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102835","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Identifying malleable predictors of academic achievement is critical for supporting individual differences in learning outcomes and informing targeted interventions. However, practical constraints often require reducing the number of predictors while still accounting for meaningful variance. In this study, we combined two machine learning approaches (ridge regression and lasso regression) with a person-centered technique, latent profile transition analysis (LPTA), to isolate key cognitive and motivational factors that differentiate learners and predict academic growth. Using a large, nationally representative longitudinal dataset, machine learning analyses identified three robust predictors from 14 propensity variables: prior reading skills, motivation, and working memory. Subsequent LPTA revealed five distinct profiles of learners based on different combinations of these variables, with most children remaining in stable profiles across kindergarten and first grade, though some showed upward transitions. Importantly, these profiles transcended socioeconomic status and diagnostic categories, and they significantly predicted growth in mathematics achievement, a skill not used to create the profiles. Findings highlight meaningful and stable individual differences in cognitive and motivational profiles that shape learning trajectories, with implications for theory development, early identification, and the development of tailored intervention strategies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48336,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Individual Differences","volume":"125 ","pages":"Article 102835"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0,"publicationDate":"2025-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145615045","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Beyond the black box: The resource-intervention match framework for explaining differential effects of self-regulated learning interventions 黑箱之外：解释自我调节学习干预差异效应的资源-干预匹配框架

IF 9 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL

Learning and Individual Differences

Pub Date : 2025-11-24 DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102843

Sirui Ren, Jeffrey A. Greene, Matthew L. Bernacki, Leiming Ding

Why do some self-regulated learning (SRL) interventions seem to benefit less competent students more than their competent peers (i.e., compensatory effect), but others seem to benefit only the already competent students (i.e., Matthew effects)? We propose the Resource-Intervention Match (RIM) framework to explain these differential outcomes. Intervention effects depend on the (mis-)match between learners' existing SRL resources and specific intervention features. We conceptualize SRL resources as comprising three components: metacognitive knowledge, metacognitive skills, and motivational-affective resources. When learners' resources align with intervention demands, learners experience gains in performance; misalignment creates non-productive experiences that hinder progress. A critical but overlooked factor is metacognitive experiences (e.g., feelings of difficulty, confidence, and satisfaction) that emerge during learning. These experiences serve as the mediating mechanism through which resource-intervention (mis-)matches influence intervention outcomes. The RIM framework provides researchers and practitioners with a systematic approach to diagnosing, predicting, and optimizing SRL intervention effects across individual differences.

Educational relevance and implications statement

This research explains why some learning interventions help struggling students catch up (compensatory effects) whereas others primarily benefit already-successful students (Matthew effects). We found that effectiveness depends on matching support to specific gaps in students' self-regulated learning: their knowledge about effective strategies, their ability to actually use these strategies, and their motivation to persist through challenges. Teachers can assess these three components separately through questionnaires and classroom observation, then provide personalized support that adjusts based on each student's needs and gradually fades as they develop skills. This approach transforms students from those requiring constant external guidance into independent learners who can systematically figure out which study approaches work best for their individual needs.

为什么一些自我调节学习（SRL）干预似乎对能力较弱的学生比能力较强的学生更有利（即，补偿效应），而另一些似乎只对已经有能力的学生有利（即，马太效应）？我们提出资源干预匹配（RIM）框架来解释这些差异结果。干预效果取决于学习者现有SRL资源与特定干预特征的（错）匹配。我们将SRL资源定义为三个组成部分：元认知知识、元认知技能和动机-情感资源。当学习者的资源与干预需求相一致时，学习者的表现就会有所提高；不一致创造了阻碍进步的非生产性体验。一个关键但被忽视的因素是学习过程中出现的元认知体验（例如，困难、自信和满足感的感觉）。这些经验是资源干预（错配）影响干预结果的中介机制。RIM框架为研究人员和从业者提供了跨越个体差异的诊断、预测和优化SRL干预效果的系统方法。教育相关性和含义陈述本研究解释了为什么一些学习干预帮助学习困难的学生赶上进度（补偿效应），而另一些主要有利于已经成功的学生（马太效应）。我们发现，有效性取决于对学生自我调节学习中具体差距的匹配支持：他们对有效策略的了解，他们实际使用这些策略的能力，以及他们坚持挑战的动机。教师可以通过问卷调查和课堂观察分别评估这三个组成部分，然后提供个性化的支持，根据每个学生的需求进行调整，并随着他们技能的发展逐渐淡出。这种方法将学生从需要持续的外部指导转变为独立的学习者，他们可以系统地找出哪种学习方法最适合他们的个人需求。

{"title":"Beyond the black box: The resource-intervention match framework for explaining differential effects of self-regulated learning interventions","authors":"Sirui Ren, Jeffrey A. Greene, Matthew L. Bernacki, Leiming Ding","doi":"10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102843","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102843","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Why do some self-regulated learning (SRL) interventions seem to benefit less competent students more than their competent peers (i.e., compensatory effect), but others seem to benefit only the already competent students (i.e., Matthew effects)? We propose the Resource-Intervention Match (RIM) framework to explain these differential outcomes. Intervention effects depend on the (mis-)match between learners' existing SRL resources and specific intervention features. We conceptualize SRL resources as comprising three components: <em>metacognitive knowledge</em>, <em>metacognitive skills</em>, and <em>motivational-affective resources</em>. When learners' resources align with intervention demands, learners experience gains in performance; misalignment creates non-productive experiences that hinder progress. A critical but overlooked factor is <em>metacognitive experiences</em> (e.g., feelings of difficulty, confidence, and satisfaction) that emerge during learning. These experiences serve as the mediating mechanism through which resource-intervention (mis-)matches influence intervention outcomes. The RIM framework provides researchers and practitioners with a systematic approach to diagnosing, predicting, and optimizing SRL intervention effects across individual differences.</div></div><div><h3>Educational relevance and implications statement</h3><div>This research explains why some learning interventions help struggling students catch up (compensatory effects) whereas others primarily benefit already-successful students (Matthew effects). We found that effectiveness depends on matching support to specific gaps in students' self-regulated learning: their knowledge about effective strategies, their ability to actually use these strategies, and their motivation to persist through challenges. Teachers can assess these three components separately through questionnaires and classroom observation, then provide personalized support that adjusts based on each student's needs and gradually fades as they develop skills. This approach transforms students from those requiring constant external guidance into independent learners who can systematically figure out which study approaches work best for their individual needs.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48336,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Individual Differences","volume":"125 ","pages":"Article 102843"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0,"publicationDate":"2025-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145615047","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Agency does not equal choice – conceptualizing agency for learning in the age of AI 代理不等于选择——人工智能时代学习代理的概念化

IF 9 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL

Learning and Individual Differences

Pub Date : 2025-11-24 DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102841

Garvin Brod

Agency has become a central theme in debates on learning with artificial intelligence (AI). Current discussions often reduce agency to the question of who makes the choices: the learner or the AI. This framing, however, is too narrow. Conceptual insights from different disciplines, together with evidence from psychology, indicate that providing learners with the opportunity to make decisions is not enough to claim that they have agency over their learning. Rather, agency requires at least three steps: 1) the opportunity to make decisions, 2) the capacity to make decisions, and 3) the capacity to enact those decisions. The capacity to make and enact decisions develops across childhood and adolescence, leading to substantial individual differences in learners' ability to exercise agency. The three-step approach can sharpen theoretical discussions by distinguishing choice from agency and offer concrete targets for educational interventions aimed at preserving and promoting agency in the age of AI.

能动性已经成为人工智能（AI）学习辩论的中心主题。目前的讨论经常将代理简化为谁做出选择的问题：学习者还是人工智能。然而，这个框架太狭隘了。来自不同学科的概念见解，以及心理学的证据表明，为学习者提供做决定的机会并不足以声称他们对自己的学习有代理权。相反，机构至少需要三个步骤：1)做决定的机会，2)做决定的能力，3)制定这些决定的能力。制定和执行决策的能力在童年和青春期发展，导致学习者在行使能动性的能力方面存在实质性的个体差异。三步方法可以通过区分选择和代理来强化理论讨论，并为旨在保护和促进人工智能时代代理的教育干预提供具体目标。

引用次数: 0

Longitudinal associations between socioeconomic status and executive function during adolescence: Evidence from the SCAMP study 青少年时期社会经济地位与执行功能之间的纵向关联：来自SCAMP研究的证据

IF 9 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL

Learning and Individual Differences

Pub Date : 2025-11-24 DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102822

R.C. Perry , E. Booth , M.S.C. Thomas , A. Tolmie , M. Röösli , M.B. Toledano , C. Shen , I. Dumontheil

Few studies have isolated associations between socioeconomic status (SES) and executive function (EF) in adolescence, when EF inequalities may be particularly consequential for academic attainment. Using data from the Study of Cognition, Adolescents and Mobile Phones (n = 2726) and multiple regressions, we evaluated relationships between SES indices (parental education and occupation, area-level deprivation, and household poverty) and EF tasks, controlling for demographic factors. Replicating findings from childhood, latent SES and EF measures associated cross-sectionally at age 12 (β = 0.11, [0.07, 0.15]). We further observed a small increase in the socioeconomic EF gradient between 12 and 14 years (β = 0.07, [0.04, 0.11]), with which was specifically associated with parental occupation and household poverty. Working memory span tasks were particularly sensitive to SES. Our results highlight specific SES-EF associations during adolescence and could help identify pupils at risk for cognitive, and therefore academic, challenges who may benefit from targeted support.

Educational relevance and implications

Individual differences in EF skills associate with educational outcomes across development, as well as health and occupational outcomes in adulthood. This study demonstrates that, in a UK sample, SES not only associates with individual differences in EF in childhood, but that over a period as short as two years, parental occupation and household poverty (but not parental education or area deprivation), associate with small but significant increasing differences in adolescents' working memory skills. By isolating specific associations between aspects of SES and EF inequalities, this study suggests family level factors have an enduring influence on cognitive skills into adolescence, which may contribute to the trend of increasing attainment inequalities seen in this age group. The findings help to narrow the pool of likely causal explanations for social inequalities in EF skills and may help to identify pupils who are at risk for cognitive, and therefore academic, challenges.

很少有研究孤立地研究社会经济地位（SES）和青少年执行功能（EF）之间的联系，而青少年执行功能的不平等可能对学业成绩产生特别重大的影响。利用来自认知、青少年和移动电话研究（n = 2726）的数据和多元回归，我们在控制人口因素的情况下，评估了社会经济地位指数（父母教育和职业、地区剥夺和家庭贫困）与EF任务之间的关系。儿童期的重复研究结果，12岁时的潜在SES和EF测量横断面相关（β = 0.11,[0.07, 0.15]）。我们进一步观察到12至14岁之间社会经济EF梯度的小幅增加（β = 0.07,[0.04, 0.11]），这与父母职业和家庭贫困特别相关。工作记忆广度任务对SES尤为敏感。我们的研究结果强调了青少年时期SES-EF的特定关联，可以帮助识别有认知风险的学生，因此可以从有针对性的支持中受益。教育的相关性和影响EF技能的个体差异与整个发展过程中的教育成果以及成年后的健康和职业成果有关。这项研究表明，在英国的一个样本中，社会地位不仅与儿童时期EF的个体差异有关，而且在短至两年的时间内，父母的职业和家庭贫困（而不是父母的教育或地区剥夺）与青少年工作记忆技能的微小但显著增加的差异有关。通过分离社会经济地位和EF不平等之间的具体联系，本研究表明，家庭层面的因素对青少年时期的认知技能有持久的影响，这可能导致该年龄组的成就不平等趋势日益加剧。这些发现有助于缩小英孚教育技能社会不平等的可能因果解释的范围，并可能有助于识别那些有认知风险的学生，从而有助于学业挑战。

{"title":"Longitudinal associations between socioeconomic status and executive function during adolescence: Evidence from the SCAMP study","authors":"R.C. Perry , E. Booth , M.S.C. Thomas , A. Tolmie , M. Röösli , M.B. Toledano , C. Shen , I. Dumontheil","doi":"10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102822","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102822","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Few studies have isolated associations between socioeconomic status (SES) and executive function (EF) in adolescence, when EF inequalities may be particularly consequential for academic attainment. Using data from the Study of Cognition, Adolescents and Mobile Phones (<em>n</em> = 2726) and multiple regressions, we evaluated relationships between SES indices (parental education and occupation, area-level deprivation, and household poverty) and EF tasks, controlling for demographic factors. Replicating findings from childhood, latent SES and EF measures associated cross-sectionally at age 12 (β = 0.11, [0.07, 0.15]). We further observed a small increase in the socioeconomic EF gradient between 12 and 14 years (β = 0.07, [0.04, 0.11]), with which was specifically associated with parental occupation and household poverty. Working memory span tasks were particularly sensitive to SES. Our results highlight specific SES-EF associations during adolescence and could help identify pupils at risk for cognitive, and therefore academic, challenges who may benefit from targeted support.</div></div><div><h3>Educational relevance and implications</h3><div>Individual differences in EF skills associate with educational outcomes across development, as well as health and occupational outcomes in adulthood. This study demonstrates that, in a UK sample, SES not only associates with individual differences in EF in childhood, but that over a period as short as two years, parental occupation and household poverty (but not parental education or area deprivation), associate with small but significant increasing differences in adolescents' working memory skills. By isolating specific associations between aspects of SES and EF inequalities, this study suggests family level factors have an enduring influence on cognitive skills into adolescence, which may contribute to the trend of increasing attainment inequalities seen in this age group. The findings help to narrow the pool of likely causal explanations for social inequalities in EF skills and may help to identify pupils who are at risk for cognitive, and therefore academic, challenges.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48336,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Individual Differences","volume":"125 ","pages":"Article 102822"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0,"publicationDate":"2025-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145615073","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0