Pub Date : 2024-06-07DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09899-6
Hyorim Ha, Hee Seung Lee
Recent studies suggest that making judgments of learning (JOLs)—self-assessment of current learning status—may not merely be a neutral cognitive process, but can directly improve learning through what is called ‘JOL reactivity’. This study investigated whether making JOLs can facilitate the learning of previously studied materials (backward effect) and newly studied materials (forward effect) in inductive learning. We also examined how this effect varies depending on whether a JOL is accompanied by a retrieval attempt. Across three experiments, participants learned about various butterfly species presented in two sections (Sections A and B). Some participants made JOLs between Section A and Section B, while others did not, and then all participants took a final transfer test for both sections. In Experiment 1, merely making JOLs did not facilitate learning compared to restudy control, regardless of whether JOLs afforded covert retrieval (target-absent JOL) or not (target-present JOL). However, in Experiment 2, when participants made JOLs combined with overt retrieval prompts (retrieval practice + JOL), they outperformed the other groups in the final transfer test of Section B, showing the forward effect. Experiment 3 further revealed that the act of making JOLs combined with overt retrieval practice was as effective as (but not more than) retrieval practice without JOLs in promoting new learning. Our findings indicate that conventional forms of JOLs do not appear to enhance inductive learning; rather, they underscore the critical role of retrieval in facilitating inductive learning.
最近的研究表明,做出学习判断(JOL)--对当前学习状况的自我评估--可能不仅仅是一个中性的认知过程,而是可以通过所谓的 "JOL反应性 "直接提高学习效果。本研究调查了在归纳学习中,做出 JOL 是否能促进对以前学习过的材料的学习(后向效应)和对新学材料的学习(前向效应)。我们还研究了这一效应如何随 JOL 是否伴有检索尝试而变化。在三次实验中,参与者学习了分两部分(A 部分和 B 部分)展示的各种蝴蝶种类。一些参与者在 A 部分和 B 部分之间进行了 JOL,而另一些参与者则没有,然后所有参与者都参加了两个部分的最终转移测试。在实验 1 中,与复习对照组相比,无论 JOL 是否提供隐蔽检索(目标不存在的 JOL),仅进行 JOL 并不能促进学习。然而,在实验 2 中,当被试在做 JOL 时结合公开的检索提示(检索练习 + JOL),他们在 B 部分的最终迁移测试中的表现优于其他组,显示了前向效应。实验 3 进一步显示,在促进新学习方面,制作 JOL 与公开检索练习相结合的行为与不制作 JOL 的检索练习一样有效(但并不更有效)。我们的研究结果表明,传统形式的JOL似乎并不能促进归纳学习;相反,它们强调了检索在促进归纳学习中的关键作用。
{"title":"Evaluating the Judgment of Learning: its Limited Impact and the Power of Retrieval on Inductive Learning","authors":"Hyorim Ha, Hee Seung Lee","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09899-6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09899-6","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Recent studies suggest that making judgments of learning (JOLs)—self-assessment of current learning status—may not merely be a neutral cognitive process, but can directly improve learning through what is called ‘JOL reactivity’. This study investigated whether making JOLs can facilitate the learning of previously studied materials (backward effect) and newly studied materials (forward effect) in inductive learning. We also examined how this effect varies depending on whether a JOL is accompanied by a retrieval attempt. Across three experiments, participants learned about various butterfly species presented in two sections (Sections A and B). Some participants made JOLs between Section A and Section B, while others did not, and then all participants took a final transfer test for both sections. In Experiment 1, merely making JOLs did not facilitate learning compared to restudy control, regardless of whether JOLs afforded covert retrieval (target-absent JOL) or not (target-present JOL). However, in Experiment 2, when participants made JOLs combined with overt retrieval prompts (retrieval practice + JOL), they outperformed the other groups in the final transfer test of Section B, showing the forward effect. Experiment 3 further revealed that the act of making JOLs combined with overt retrieval practice was as effective as (but not more than) retrieval practice without JOLs in promoting new learning. Our findings indicate that conventional forms of JOLs do not appear to enhance inductive learning; rather, they underscore the critical role of retrieval in facilitating inductive learning.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141287224","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}
Pub Date : 2024-06-07DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09882-1
Shaohang Liu, Wenbo Zhao, David R. Shanks, Xiao Hu, Liang Luo, Chunliang Yang
Practice testing (i.e., practice retrieval) has been established as an effective learning strategy. Uncovering potential factors influencing self-testing usage is a prerequisite to promote its practical use. The present study reports five experiments exploring whether test anxiety (TA) and test stake (1) affect self-testing usage (Experiments 1–5) and (2) influence learning performance through their negative effects on self-testing usage (Experiments 1, 4, and 5). Experiment 1 analyzed data from 459 high school students collected via a survey and found both that TA negatively predicted students’ daily use of self-testing and that self-testing usage mediated the negative association between TA and academic performance. The negative association between TA and self-testing usage was further replicated in a laboratory experiment (Experiment 2). Another quasi-experiment (Experiment 3) showed that students were less likely to test themselves when preparing for a high-stake than a low-stake exam. Experiment 4 replicated this finding and additionally demonstrated that a high-stake test led to poorer learning via its negative influence on self-testing usage. Experiment 5 demonstrated that a high-stake test provoked high state anxiety, which then induced avoidance of self-testing and ultimately impaired learning. Overall, these findings demonstrate a negative effect of TA on self-testing usage, in turn leading to poor learning. Practical implications are discussed.
{"title":"Effects of Test Anxiety on Self-Testing and Learning Performance","authors":"Shaohang Liu, Wenbo Zhao, David R. Shanks, Xiao Hu, Liang Luo, Chunliang Yang","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09882-1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09882-1","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Practice testing (i.e., practice retrieval) has been established as an effective learning strategy. Uncovering potential factors influencing self-testing usage is a prerequisite to promote its practical use. The present study reports five experiments exploring whether test anxiety (TA) and test stake (1) affect self-testing usage (Experiments 1–5) and (2) influence learning performance through their negative effects on self-testing usage (Experiments 1, 4, and 5). Experiment 1 analyzed data from 459 high school students collected via a survey and found both that TA negatively predicted students’ daily use of self-testing and that self-testing usage mediated the negative association between TA and academic performance. The negative association between TA and self-testing usage was further replicated in a laboratory experiment (Experiment 2). Another quasi-experiment (Experiment 3) showed that students were less likely to test themselves when preparing for a high-stake than a low-stake exam. Experiment 4 replicated this finding and additionally demonstrated that a high-stake test led to poorer learning via its negative influence on self-testing usage. Experiment 5 demonstrated that a high-stake test provoked high state anxiety, which then induced avoidance of self-testing and ultimately impaired learning. Overall, these findings demonstrate a negative effect of TA on self-testing usage, in turn leading to poor learning. Practical implications are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141287237","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}
Pub Date : 2024-06-05DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09894-x
Alexander Skulmowski
Generative AIs have been embraced by learners wishing to offload (parts of) complex tasks. However, recent research suggests that AI users are at risk of failing to correctly monitor the extent of their own contribution when being assisted by an AI. This difficulty in keeping track of the division of labor has been shown to result in placebo and ghostwriter effects. In case of the AI-based placebo effect, users overestimate their ability while or after being assisted by an AI. The ghostwriter effect occurs when AI users do not disclose their AI use despite being aware of the contribution made by an AI. These two troubling effects are discussed in the context of the conflict between cognitive externalization and anthropomorphization. While people tend to offload cognitive load into their environment, they also often perceive technology as human-like. However, despite the natural conversations that can be had with current AIs, the desire to attribute human-like qualities that would require the acknowledgment of AI contributions appears to be lacking. Implications and suggestions on how to improve AI use, for example, by employing embodied AI agents, are discussed.
{"title":"Placebo or Assistant? Generative AI Between Externalization and Anthropomorphization","authors":"Alexander Skulmowski","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09894-x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09894-x","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Generative AIs have been embraced by learners wishing to offload (parts of) complex tasks. However, recent research suggests that AI users are at risk of failing to correctly monitor the extent of their own contribution when being assisted by an AI. This difficulty in keeping track of the division of labor has been shown to result in placebo and ghostwriter effects. In case of the AI-based placebo effect, users overestimate their ability while or after being assisted by an AI. The ghostwriter effect occurs when AI users do not disclose their AI use despite being aware of the contribution made by an AI. These two troubling effects are discussed in the context of the conflict between cognitive externalization and anthropomorphization. While people tend to offload cognitive load into their environment, they also often perceive technology as human-like. However, despite the natural conversations that can be had with current AIs, the desire to attribute human-like qualities that would require the acknowledgment of AI contributions appears to be lacking. Implications and suggestions on how to improve AI use, for example, by employing embodied AI agents, are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"101 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141251659","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}
Pub Date : 2024-06-04DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09892-z
Achraf Ammar, Khaled Trabelsi, Mohamed Ali Boujelbane, Atef Salem, Omar Boukhris, Jordan M. Glenn, Piotr Zmijewski, Haitham A. Jahrami, Hamdi Chtourou, Wolfgang I. Schöllhorn
The paradoxical effects of contextual interference (CI) assume that high CI practices hinder performances during the acquisition phase of learning, while providing more permanent enhancement during the retention phase. This meta-analysis evaluates the possible generalizability of the CI phenomenon in physical education (PE) and sports contexts, with regard to the acute and relatively permanent gains in performance outcomes. A total of 933 records from five electronic databases were screened using the PICOS criteria, of which 36 studies were selected. Outcomes evaluating the performance changes (Δ) from pre-post, post-retention, and pre-retention tests were included. Out of 183 overall pooled outcomes, Δ in only 37 performance outcomes (20%) agreed with the paradoxical CI effects on the acquisition or the relatively permanent gains. No statistically significant overall difference was detected for “Δ pre-post” between low (blocked) (28.9 ± 59.5%) and high (random/serial) (27.9 ± 52.8%) CI (effect size (ES) = 0.1, p = 0.35). An overall significant difference (p = 0.001) in favor of high CI practice was detected in “Δ post-retention.” However, this difference was not large enough (ES = − 0.35) to produce an overall greater long-term gain following high (24.56 ± 4.4%), compared to low (21.9 ± 9.8%) CI (ES = − 0.13, p = 0.18). Out of 10 tested variables, only the age significantly moderated both CI effects (p < 0.0001 for both Δ pre-post and Δ pre-retention) and the female proportion significantly moderated only the first CI effect (p = 0.009 for Δ pre-post). These findings found very limited evidence supporting the recommendation to employ high CI practices to gain a longer-term performance advantage, calling into question the generalization of the CI model to PE and sports practices. High-quality follow-up research evaluating alternative motor-learning models are therefore needed.
情境干扰(CI)的悖论效应假定,高CI练习会在学习的习得阶段阻碍成绩的提高,而在保持阶段则会提供更持久的提高。本荟萃分析评估了在体育教育(PE)和体育运动中,情境干扰现象可能具有的普遍性,以及在成绩提高方面的急性和相对持久性。采用 PICOS 标准从五个电子数据库中筛选出 933 条记录,并从中选出 36 项研究。研究结果评估了前后、保持后和保持前测试的成绩变化(Δ)。在 183 项汇总的总体结果中,只有 37 项成绩结果(20%)的 Δ 与 CI 对习得或相对永久性收益的悖论效应一致。在 "Δ 前-后 "方面,低 CI(封锁)(28.9 ± 59.5%)和高 CI(随机/串行)(27.9 ± 52.8%)之间没有发现有统计学意义的整体差异(效应大小 (ES) = 0.1,p = 0.35)。在 "Δ后保留 "中发现了有利于高 CI 实践的总体重大差异(p = 0.001)。然而,这种差异还不够大(ES = - 0.35),不足以使高 CI(24.56 ± 4.4%)与低 CI(21.9 ± 9.8%)相比产生更大的长期收益(ES = - 0.13,p = 0.18)。在 10 个测试变量中,只有年龄能显著调节两种 CI 效应(Δ 前-后和 Δ 前-保留的 p < 0.0001),而女性比例仅能显著调节第一种 CI 效应(Δ 前-后的 p = 0.009)。这些研究结果发现,支持采用高 CI 实践以获得长期成绩优势的建议的证据非常有限,这使人们对将 CI 模型推广到体育和运动实践中产生了疑问。因此,需要对其他运动学习模式进行高质量的后续评估研究。
{"title":"The Effects of Contextual Interference Learning on the Acquisition and Relatively Permanent Gains in Skilled Performance: A Critical Systematic Review with Multilevel Meta-Analysis","authors":"Achraf Ammar, Khaled Trabelsi, Mohamed Ali Boujelbane, Atef Salem, Omar Boukhris, Jordan M. Glenn, Piotr Zmijewski, Haitham A. Jahrami, Hamdi Chtourou, Wolfgang I. Schöllhorn","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09892-z","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09892-z","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The paradoxical effects of contextual interference (CI) assume that high CI practices hinder performances during the acquisition phase of learning, while providing more permanent enhancement during the retention phase. This meta-analysis evaluates the possible generalizability of the CI phenomenon in physical education (PE) and sports contexts, with regard to the acute and relatively permanent gains in performance outcomes. A total of 933 records from five electronic databases were screened using the PICOS criteria, of which 36 studies were selected. Outcomes evaluating the performance changes (Δ) from pre-post, post-retention, and pre-retention tests were included. Out of 183 overall pooled outcomes, Δ in only 37 performance outcomes (20%) agreed with the paradoxical CI effects on the acquisition or the relatively permanent gains. No statistically significant overall difference was detected for “Δ pre-post” between low (blocked) (28.9 ± 59.5%) and high (random/serial) (27.9 ± 52.8%) CI (effect size (ES) = 0.1, <i>p</i> = 0.35). An overall significant difference (<i>p</i> = 0.001) in favor of high CI practice was detected in “Δ post-retention.” However, this difference was not large enough (ES = − 0.35) to produce an overall greater long-term gain following high (24.56 ± 4.4%), compared to low (21.9 ± 9.8%) CI (ES = − 0.13, <i>p</i> = 0.18). Out of 10 tested variables, only the age significantly moderated both CI effects (<i>p</i> < 0.0001 for both Δ pre-post and Δ pre-retention) and the female proportion significantly moderated only the first CI effect (<i>p</i> = 0.009 for Δ pre-post). These findings found very limited evidence supporting the recommendation to employ high CI practices to gain a longer-term performance advantage, calling into question the generalization of the CI model to PE and sports practices. High-quality follow-up research evaluating alternative motor-learning models are therefore needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"102 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141246506","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}
Pub Date : 2024-06-01DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09897-8
Palmira Faraci, Gaia Azzurra Malluzzo
The phenomenon of statistics anxiety, prevalent particularly among students engaged in non-mathematical disciplines such as the social sciences, has been linked to a multitude of detrimental outcomes. Over time, several instruments have been developed to measure this construct; however, a comprehensive analysis of these instruments and an adequate evaluation of their psychometric properties have been conspicuously absent. In an attempt to bridge this gap, we undertook a systematic review in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and PubMed. Our focus was on studies that were published in peer-reviewed English journals and reported a self-report measure of statistics anxiety. These included both original developments and further validations. We employed Skinner’s three-stage framework to assess the methodological quality of the instruments that were retrieved. Out of the 225 results that our search yielded, a mere 28 satisfied the inclusion criteria. The resulting papers reported on the psychometric properties of eight scales. The identified measures undoubtedly provide the potential of capturing some of the key features of the construct. However, our analyses unveiled certain psychometric limitations. Consequently, we advise researchers to either use the most psychometrically robust measures or conduct additional evaluations to ensure the accuracy of their results.
{"title":"Psychometric Properties of Statistics Anxiety Measures: A Systematic Review","authors":"Palmira Faraci, Gaia Azzurra Malluzzo","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09897-8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09897-8","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The phenomenon of statistics anxiety, prevalent particularly among students engaged in non-mathematical disciplines such as the social sciences, has been linked to a multitude of detrimental outcomes. Over time, several instruments have been developed to measure this construct; however, a comprehensive analysis of these instruments and an adequate evaluation of their psychometric properties have been conspicuously absent. In an attempt to bridge this gap, we undertook a systematic review in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and PubMed. Our focus was on studies that were published in peer-reviewed English journals and reported a self-report measure of statistics anxiety. These included both original developments and further validations. We employed Skinner’s three-stage framework to assess the methodological quality of the instruments that were retrieved. Out of the 225 results that our search yielded, a mere 28 satisfied the inclusion criteria. The resulting papers reported on the psychometric properties of eight scales. The identified measures undoubtedly provide the potential of capturing some of the key features of the construct. However, our analyses unveiled certain psychometric limitations. Consequently, we advise researchers to either use the most psychometrically robust measures or conduct additional evaluations to ensure the accuracy of their results.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141185145","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}
Pub Date : 2024-05-23DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09861-6
Tamara van Gog, Eva Janssen, Florence Lucas, Maaike Taheij
Research in cognitive load theory is increasingly recognizing the importance of motivational influences on students’ (willingness to invest) mental effort, in particular in the context of self-regulated learning. Consequently, next to addressing effects of instructional conditions and contexts on groups of learners, there is a need to start investigating individual differences in motivational variables. We propose here that the biopsychosocial model of challenge and threat may offer a useful model to study the motivational antecedents of (anticipated) mental effort. We also report four experiments as initial tests of these ideas, exploring how feedback valence affects students’ challenge/threat experiences, self-efficacy, and mental effort investment. The results showed that negative feedback leads participants to expect that they will have to invest significantly more effort in future problems than positive feedback (Experiments 1, 2, and 3) or no feedback (Experiment 3). Had we not considered the motivational variables in investigating the effect of feedback conditions on effort investment, we would not have known that this effect was fully mediated and thus explained by participants’ feelings of self-efficacy (Experiments 1/2) and threat (Experiment 1). We would also have concluded that feedback does not affect the willingness to invest effort in future problems (all four experiments), whereas actually, there were significant indirect effects of feedback on willingness to invest effort via challenge (in Experiments 1/2) and threat (in all experiments). Thus, our findings demonstrate the added value of considering challenge and threat motivational states to explain individual differences in effort investment.
{"title":"A Motivational Perspective on (Anticipated) Mental Effort Investment: The Biopsychosocial Model of Challenge and Threat","authors":"Tamara van Gog, Eva Janssen, Florence Lucas, Maaike Taheij","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09861-6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09861-6","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Research in cognitive load theory is increasingly recognizing the importance of motivational influences on students’ (willingness to invest) mental effort, in particular in the context of self-regulated learning. Consequently, next to addressing effects of instructional conditions and contexts on groups of learners, there is a need to start investigating individual differences in motivational variables. We propose here that the biopsychosocial model of challenge and threat may offer a useful model to study the motivational antecedents of (anticipated) mental effort. We also report four experiments as initial tests of these ideas, exploring how feedback valence affects students’ challenge/threat experiences, self-efficacy, and mental effort investment. The results showed that negative feedback leads participants to expect that they will have to invest significantly more effort in future problems than positive feedback (Experiments 1, 2, and 3) or no feedback (Experiment 3). Had we not considered the motivational variables in investigating the effect of feedback conditions on effort investment, we would not have known that this effect was fully mediated and thus explained by participants’ feelings of self-efficacy (Experiments 1/2) and threat (Experiment 1). We would also have concluded that feedback does not affect the willingness to invest effort in future problems (all four experiments), whereas actually, there were significant indirect effects of feedback on willingness to invest effort via challenge (in Experiments 1/2) and threat (in all experiments). Thus, our findings demonstrate the added value of considering challenge and threat motivational states to explain individual differences in effort investment.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141085330","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}
Pub Date : 2024-05-21DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09887-w
Herbert W. Marsh, Jiesi Guo, Reinhard Pekrun, Oliver Lüdtke, Fernando Núñez-Regueiro
Multi-wave-cross-lagged-panel models (CLPMs) of directional ordering are a focus of much controversy in educational psychology and more generally. Extending traditional analyses, methodologists have recently argued for including random intercepts and lag2 effects between non-adjacent waves and giving more attention to controlling covariates. However, the related issues of appropriate time intervals between waves (lag1 intervals across waves) and the possibility of contemporaneous (lag0) effects within each wave are largely unresolved. Although philosophers, theologians, and scientists widely debate sequential (lagged) and simultaneous (lag0) theories of causality, CLPM researchers have mostly ignored contemporaneous effects, arguing causes must precede effects. In a substantive-methodological synergy, we integrated these issues and designed new structural equation models to reanalyze one of the strongest CLPM studies of academic self-concept (ASC) and achievement (five annuals of mathematics data; 3527 secondary school students). A taxonomy of models incorporating various combinations of lag0, lag1, and lag2 effects, random intercepts, and covariates consistently supported a priori reciprocal effect model (REM) predictions—medium or large reciprocal effects of ASC and achievement on each other. Consistent with self-concept theory, effects of ASC on achievement evolved over time (lag1, not lag0 effects), whereas effects of achievement on ASC effects were more contemporaneous (lag0, not lag1 effects). We argue that lag0 effects reflect proximal events occurring subsequent to the previous data wave, suggesting the need for shorter intervals but also leaving open the possibility of contemporaneous effects that are truly instantaneous. We discuss limitations and future directions but also note the broad applicability of our statistical models.
{"title":"Cracking Chicken-Egg Conundrums: Juxtaposing Contemporaneous and Lagged Reciprocal Effects Models of Academic Self-Concept and Achievement’s Directional Ordering","authors":"Herbert W. Marsh, Jiesi Guo, Reinhard Pekrun, Oliver Lüdtke, Fernando Núñez-Regueiro","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09887-w","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09887-w","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Multi-wave-cross-lagged-panel models (CLPMs) of directional ordering are a focus of much controversy in educational psychology and more generally. Extending traditional analyses, methodologists have recently argued for including random intercepts and lag2 effects between non-adjacent waves and giving more attention to controlling covariates. However, the related issues of appropriate time intervals between waves (lag1 intervals across waves) and the possibility of contemporaneous (lag0) effects within each wave are largely unresolved. Although philosophers, theologians, and scientists widely debate sequential (lagged) and simultaneous (lag0) theories of causality, CLPM researchers have mostly ignored contemporaneous effects, arguing causes <i>must</i> precede effects. In a substantive-methodological synergy, we integrated these issues and designed new structural equation models to reanalyze one of the strongest CLPM studies of academic self-concept (ASC) and achievement (five annuals of mathematics data; 3527 secondary school students). A taxonomy of models incorporating various combinations of lag0, lag1, and lag2 effects, random intercepts, and covariates consistently supported a priori reciprocal effect model (REM) predictions—medium or large reciprocal effects of ASC and achievement on each other. Consistent with self-concept theory, effects of ASC on achievement evolved over time (lag1, not lag0 effects), whereas effects of achievement on ASC effects were more contemporaneous (lag0, not lag1 effects). We argue that lag0 effects reflect proximal events occurring subsequent to the previous data wave, suggesting the need for shorter intervals but also leaving open the possibility of contemporaneous effects that are truly instantaneous. We discuss limitations and future directions but also note the broad applicability of our statistical models.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141079232","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}
Pub Date : 2024-05-18DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09891-0
Isabelle Ball, Moitree Banerjee, Andrew Holliman, Ian Tyndall
The transition to university is a time of great change and adjustment. The challenges of university life can lead to numerous negative consequences for the students. Despite the importance of successful transition for both the student and the university, the current body of literature comprises methodological inconsistencies and disparate analytical goals that make it difficult to identify the most salient and effective factors that help predict transition success. This paper presents a systematic review of research linking personal level risk and protective factors to the outcome of academic achievement among students making the transition to university. This is part of a larger review, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) guidelines, preregistered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO, CRD42022330515), searching PsychInfo, Web of Science, and ERIC databases. Records were included if they studied ‘traditional’ first year students transitioning to university and were longitudinal in design and excluded if they looked at specific subgroups of students (e.g. international students). The search yielded 27 articles that were eligible, highlighting a broad range of salient factors ranging from personality traits to procrastination and perfectionism. The findings are discussed in relation to moving the research forward towards an intervention to enhance the probability of successful student transition to university.
升入大学是一个巨大变化和调整的时期。大学生活的挑战会给学生带来许多负面影响。尽管成功过渡对学生和大学都很重要,但目前的文献包括方法上的不一致和分析目标上的差异,这使得我们很难确定有助于预测过渡成功的最突出和最有效的因素。本文系统回顾了将个人层面的风险和保护因素与升入大学的学生学业成绩挂钩的研究。这是一项大型综述的一部分,该综述遵循了系统综述和荟萃分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)和无荟萃分析综合(SWiM)指南,在系统综述国际前瞻性登记册(PROSPERO,CRD42022330515)上进行了预先登记,并搜索了 PsychInfo、Web of Science 和 ERIC 数据库。如果研究对象是 "传统的 "大学一年级过渡学生,并且是纵向研究,则被纳入研究范围;如果研究对象是特定的学生亚群(如留学生),则被排除在外。搜索结果显示有 27 篇文章符合条件,突出了从个性特征到拖延症和完美主义等广泛的突出因素。我们将对研究结果进行讨论,以便推动研究工作,采取干预措施,提高学生成功过渡到大学的概率。
{"title":"Investigating Success in the Transition to University: A Systematic Review of Personal Risk and Protective Factors Influencing Academic Achievement","authors":"Isabelle Ball, Moitree Banerjee, Andrew Holliman, Ian Tyndall","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09891-0","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09891-0","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The transition to university is a time of great change and adjustment. The challenges of university life can lead to numerous negative consequences for the students. Despite the importance of successful transition for both the student and the university, the current body of literature comprises methodological inconsistencies and disparate analytical goals that make it difficult to identify the most salient and effective factors that help predict transition success. This paper presents a systematic review of research linking personal level risk and protective factors to the outcome of academic achievement among students making the transition to university. This is part of a larger review, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) guidelines, preregistered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO, CRD42022330515), searching PsychInfo, Web of Science, and ERIC databases. Records were included if they studied ‘traditional’ first year students transitioning to university and were longitudinal in design and excluded if they looked at specific subgroups of students (e.g. international students). The search yielded 27 articles that were eligible, highlighting a broad range of salient factors ranging from personality traits to procrastination and perfectionism. The findings are discussed in relation to moving the research forward towards an intervention to enhance the probability of successful student transition to university.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140961554","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}
Pub Date : 2024-05-10DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09890-1
Tina Seufert, Verena Hamm, Andrea Vogt, Valentin Riemer
Self-regulated learning depends on task difficulty and on learners’ resources and cognitive load, as described by an inverted U-shaped relationship in Seufert’s (2018) model: for easy tasks, resources are high and load is low, so there is no need to regulate, whereas for difficult tasks, load is too high and resources are too low to regulate. Only at moderate task difficulty do learners regulate, as resources and load are in equilibrium. The purpose of this study is to validate this model, i.e., the inverted U-shaped relationship between task difficulty and self-regulatory activities, as well as learner resources and cognitive load as mediators. In the within-subject study, 67 participants reported their cognitive and metacognitive strategy use for four exams of varying difficulty. For each exam task difficulty, cognitive load, and available resources (such as prior knowledge, interest, etc.) were assessed. Multilevel analysis revealed an inverted U-shaped relationship between task difficulty and the use of cognitive strategies. For metacognitive strategies, only a linear relationship was found. Increasing cognitive load mediated these relationship patterns. For learner resources we found a competitive mediation, indicating that further mediators could be relevant. In future investigations a broader range of task difficulty should be examined.
自我调节学习取决于任务难度以及学习者的资源和认知负荷,正如Seufert(2018)模型中的倒 "U "型关系所描述的那样:对于简单的任务,资源多而负荷少,因此不需要调节;而对于困难的任务,负荷太高而资源太少,无法调节。只有在中等难度的任务中,学习者才会调节,因为资源和负荷处于平衡状态。本研究的目的是验证这一模型,即任务难度与自我调节活动之间的倒 U 型关系,以及作为中介的学习者资源和认知负荷。在主体内研究中,67 名参与者报告了他们在四次不同难度的考试中使用认知和元认知策略的情况。对每次考试的任务难度、认知负荷和可用资源(如已有知识、兴趣等)进行了评估。多层次分析表明,任务难度与认知策略的使用之间存在倒 U 型关系。在元认知策略方面,只发现了线性关系。认知负荷的增加对这些关系模式起到了中介作用。在学习者资源方面,我们发现了一种竞争性的中介关系,这表明其他中介因素也可能与之相关。在未来的调查中,我们应该对更广泛的任务难度进行研究。
{"title":"The Interplay of Cognitive Load, Learners’ Resources and Self-regulation","authors":"Tina Seufert, Verena Hamm, Andrea Vogt, Valentin Riemer","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09890-1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09890-1","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Self-regulated learning depends on task difficulty and on learners’ resources and cognitive load, as described by an inverted U-shaped relationship in Seufert’s (2018) model: for easy tasks, resources are high and load is low, so there is no need to regulate, whereas for difficult tasks, load is too high and resources are too low to regulate. Only at moderate task difficulty do learners regulate, as resources and load are in equilibrium. The purpose of this study is to validate this model, i.e., the inverted U-shaped relationship between task difficulty and self-regulatory activities, as well as learner resources and cognitive load as mediators. In the within-subject study, 67 participants reported their cognitive and metacognitive strategy use for four exams of varying difficulty. For each exam task difficulty, cognitive load, and available resources (such as prior knowledge, interest, etc.) were assessed. Multilevel analysis revealed an inverted U-shaped relationship between task difficulty and the use of cognitive strategies. For metacognitive strategies, only a linear relationship was found. Increasing cognitive load mediated these relationship patterns. For learner resources we found a competitive mediation, indicating that further mediators could be relevant. In future investigations a broader range of task difficulty should be examined.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140903290","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}
Pub Date : 2024-05-07DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09889-8
Daniel R. Espinas, Brennan W. Chandler
We conducted a systematic review of research involving K-12 students that examined associations among individual differences factors (e.g., working memory) and intertextual integration. We identified 25 studies published in 23 peer-reviewed journal articles and two dissertations/theses. These examined a wide range of individual difference factors, which we organized into four categories: (a) language and literacy, (b) cognition and metacognition, (c) knowledge and beliefs, and (d) motivation, emotion, and personality. We found large variation in the participants, tasks, and document types, and little systematic replication across studies. Nonetheless, results generally showed that variation in literacy, cognition, metacognition, knowledge, beliefs, and motivation are positively and moderately associated with intertextual integration. We discuss the limitations of this work and offer four recommendations for future research.
{"title":"Correlates of K-12 Students’ Intertextual Integration","authors":"Daniel R. Espinas, Brennan W. Chandler","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09889-8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09889-8","url":null,"abstract":"<p>We conducted a systematic review of research involving K-12 students that examined associations among individual differences factors (e.g., working memory) and intertextual integration. We identified 25 studies published in 23 peer-reviewed journal articles and two dissertations/theses. These examined a wide range of individual difference factors, which we organized into four categories: (a) language and literacy, (b) cognition and metacognition, (c) knowledge and beliefs, and (d) motivation, emotion, and personality. We found large variation in the participants, tasks, and document types, and little systematic replication across studies. Nonetheless, results generally showed that variation in literacy, cognition, metacognition, knowledge, beliefs, and motivation are positively and moderately associated with intertextual integration. We discuss the limitations of this work and offer four recommendations for future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140875140","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}