首页 > 最新文献

Educational Psychology Review最新文献

英文 中文
The Relationship Between Self-Regulated Learning and Executive Functions—a Systematic Review 自我调节学习与执行功能之间的关系--系统回顾
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-08-22 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09932-8
Laura Dörrenbächer-Ulrich, Marius Bregulla

Self-regulated learning (SRL) and executive functions (EF) are broad concepts stemming from different research areas. They have been defined and modeled in various ways and are repeatedly related to each other in the literature, but so far, no systematic analyses of these relations have been published. Therefore, a systematic analysis of their relationships described in the literature was conducted. Nineteen studies were synthesized concerning different categories (age groups, measurement methods, role of metacognition, relation to achievement, and longitudinal/intervention studies). In general, primarily low to moderate correlational relationships between SRL and EF were reported, with no detectable pattern depending on the age group. Measurement methods used to capture SRL and EF seem to influence the size of the correlations, with indirect measures correlating higher than direct/indirect measures. In addition, there is evidence that metacognition mediates the relationship between EF and SRL. In general, the notion that EF predicts SRL but not vice versa is supported. Following the systematic review, the results are critically discussed in the light of non-generalizable samples, measurement methods, and results interpretation issues. Suggestions for theory building and promising future research are given.

自我调节学习(SRL)和执行功能(EF)是源自不同研究领域的广泛概念。在文献中,它们以不同的方式被定义和建模,并被反复地联系在一起,但迄今为止,还没有发表过对这些关系的系统分析。因此,我们对文献中描述的它们之间的关系进行了系统分析。共归纳了 19 项不同类别的研究(年龄组、测量方法、元认知的作用、与成绩的关系以及纵向/干预研究)。总体而言,SRL 与 EF 之间主要存在低度到中度的相关关系,没有发现与年龄组有关的模式。用于捕捉 SRL 和 EF 的测量方法似乎会影响相关性的大小,间接测量的相关性高于直接/间接测量的相关性。此外,有证据表明,元认知对 EF 和 SRL 之间的关系起着中介作用。总体而言,EF 预测 SRL 而不是反向预测 SRL 的观点得到了支持。在系统性综述之后,我们根据非普遍性样本、测量方法和结果解释问题对研究结果进行了批判性讨论。对理论建设和未来研究前景提出了建议。
{"title":"The Relationship Between Self-Regulated Learning and Executive Functions—a Systematic Review","authors":"Laura Dörrenbächer-Ulrich, Marius Bregulla","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09932-8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09932-8","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Self-regulated learning (SRL) and executive functions (EF) are broad concepts stemming from different research areas. They have been defined and modeled in various ways and are repeatedly related to each other in the literature, but so far, no systematic analyses of these relations have been published. Therefore, a systematic analysis of their relationships described in the literature was conducted. Nineteen studies were synthesized concerning different categories (age groups, measurement methods, role of metacognition, relation to achievement, and longitudinal/intervention studies). In general, primarily low to moderate correlational relationships between SRL and EF were reported, with no detectable pattern depending on the age group. Measurement methods used to capture SRL and EF seem to influence the size of the correlations, with indirect measures correlating higher than direct/indirect measures. In addition, there is evidence that metacognition mediates the relationship between EF and SRL. In general, the notion that EF predicts SRL but not vice versa is supported. Following the systematic review, the results are critically discussed in the light of non-generalizable samples, measurement methods, and results interpretation issues. Suggestions for theory building and promising future research are given.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"49 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142022241","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
Identifying the Most Cited Articles and Authors in Educational Psychology Journals from 1988 to 2023 确定 1988 年至 2023 年教育心理学期刊中被引用次数最多的文章和作者
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-08-21 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09938-2
Waseem Hassan, Amedee Marchand Martella, Daniel H. Robinson

Over the past 30 years, several reviews have examined scholarly contributions of individual researchers and institutions in the field of educational psychology (Fong et al., Educational Psychology Review 34:2379–2403, 2022; Greenbaum et al., Educational Psychology Review 28:215–223, 2016; Hsieh et al., Contemporary Educational Psychology 29:333–343, 2004; Jones et al., Contemporary Educational Psychology 35:11–16, 2010; Smith et al., Contemporary Educational Psychology 23:173–181, 1998; Smith et al., Contemporary Educational Psychology 28:422–430, 2003). However, no reviews have specifically examined scholarly impact as measured by citations since (Walberg, Current Contents 22:5–14, 1990) did so over 34 years ago. The present review focused on the period from 1988 to 2023, identifying the most cited articles and authors since Walberg's study that focused on the period from 1966–1988. Whereas most of the previous reviews have been limited in terms of brief time periods (e.g., six years) and a small set of journals (e.g., five), our scope included 12 educational psychology journals across 36 years. The most cited article (over 9000 times) by (Ryan and Deci, Contemporary Educational Psychology 25:54–67, 2000) had more than twice as many citations as the second most cited article by (Pintrich and Groot, Journal of Educational Psychology 82:33–40, 1990). Most of the top 30 most cited articles, including four of the top five, addressed the topic of motivation. With regard to highly cited authors, the top five were John Sweller, Richard E. Mayer, Fred Paas, Richard M. Ryan, and Reinhard Pekrun. Several of the 30 most cited authors have never appeared in previous lists of most productive authors. Finally, keyword and cluster analyses revealed most popular topics and collaborative networks among many of the most cited authors that may partly explain their productivity. Examining article and author impact is an important complement to productivity when considering scholarly contributions to the field of educational psychology.

在过去的 30 年中,有多篇评论对教育心理学领域的个别研究人员和机构的学术贡献进行了研究(Fong 等人,《教育心理学评论》34:2379-2403,2022 年;Greenbaum 等人,《教育心理学评论》28:215-223,2016 年;Hsieh 等人,《当代教育心理学》29:333-343,2004 年;Jones 等人,《当代教育心理学》35:11-16,2010 年;Smith 等人,《当代教育心理学》23:173-174,2010 年)、当代教育心理学》29:333-343,2004;琼斯等,《当代教育心理学》35:11-16,2010;史密斯等,《当代教育心理学》23:173-181,1998;史密斯等,《当代教育心理学》28:422-430,2003)。然而,自从(沃尔伯格,《当代内容》22:5-14,1990 年)34 年前对学术影响进行了研究以来,还没有评论专门研究过以引用次数衡量的学术影响。本综述重点关注 1988 年至 2023 年这一时期,确定自沃尔伯格的研究(重点关注 1966-1988 年这一时期)以来被引用次数最多的文章和作者。以往的综述大多局限于短暂的时间段(如六年)和一小部分期刊(如五种),而我们的综述范围则包括 12 种教育心理学期刊,时间跨度长达 36 年。被引用次数最多的文章(Ryan 和 Deci,《当代教育心理学》25:54-67,2000 年)的引用次数(超过 9000 次)是被引用次数第二多的文章(Pintrich 和 Groot,《教育心理学杂志》82:33-40,1990 年)的两倍多。在被引用次数最多的前 30 篇文章中,大部分(包括前 5 篇中的 4 篇)都涉及了动机这一主题。在被引用次数最多的作者中,前五位分别是约翰-斯威勒、理查德-E-梅耶、弗雷德-帕斯、理查德-M-瑞安和莱因哈特-佩克伦。在被引用次数最多的 30 位作者中,有几位从未出现在以往的高产作者名单中。最后,关键词和聚类分析揭示了许多被引用次数最多的作者中最热门的话题和合作网络,这可能是他们高产的部分原因。在考虑教育心理学领域的学术贡献时,对文章和作者影响力的研究是对生产力的重要补充。
{"title":"Identifying the Most Cited Articles and Authors in Educational Psychology Journals from 1988 to 2023","authors":"Waseem Hassan, Amedee Marchand Martella, Daniel H. Robinson","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09938-2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09938-2","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Over the past 30 years, several reviews have examined scholarly contributions of individual researchers and institutions in the field of educational psychology (Fong et al., Educational Psychology Review 34:2379–2403, 2022; Greenbaum et al., Educational Psychology Review 28:215–223, 2016; Hsieh et al., Contemporary Educational Psychology 29:333–343, 2004; Jones et al., Contemporary Educational Psychology 35:11–16, 2010; Smith et al., Contemporary Educational Psychology 23:173–181, 1998; Smith et al., Contemporary Educational Psychology 28:422–430, 2003). However, no reviews have specifically examined scholarly impact as measured by citations since (Walberg, Current Contents 22:5–14, 1990) did so over 34 years ago. The present review focused on the period from 1988 to 2023, identifying the most cited articles and authors since Walberg's study that focused on the period from 1966–1988. Whereas most of the previous reviews have been limited in terms of brief time periods (e.g., six years) and a small set of journals (e.g., five), our scope included 12 educational psychology journals across 36 years. The most cited article (over 9000 times) by (Ryan and Deci, Contemporary Educational Psychology 25:54–67, 2000) had more than twice as many citations as the second most cited article by (Pintrich and Groot, Journal of Educational Psychology 82:33–40, 1990). Most of the top 30 most cited articles, including four of the top five, addressed the topic of motivation. With regard to highly cited authors, the top five were John Sweller, Richard E. Mayer, Fred Paas, Richard M. Ryan, and Reinhard Pekrun. Several of the 30 most cited authors have never appeared in previous lists of most productive authors. Finally, keyword and cluster analyses revealed most popular topics and collaborative networks among many of the most cited authors that may partly explain their productivity. Examining article and author impact is an important complement to productivity when considering scholarly contributions to the field of educational psychology.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142013900","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 Associations Between Parenting Self-Efficacy and Parents’ Contributions to the Home-School Partnership Among Parents of Primary School Students: a Multilevel Meta-analysis 小学生家长的育儿自我效能感与家长对家校合作的贡献之间的关联:多层次元分析
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-08-20 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09937-3
Tianyi Ma, Cassandra L. Tellegen, Julie Hodges, Matthew R. Sanders

High-quality partnerships between families and schools can bring enormous benefits to the development, learning, and wellbeing of children. Decades of research has identified parenting self-efficacy as a key factor influencing parents’ contributions toward effective home-school partnerships. However, the strength of this association has varied significantly across studies with the aggregated strength remaining unclear. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the associations between parenting self-efficacy and various aspects of parents’ contribution to the home-school partnership, namely home-based involvement, school-based involvement, home-school communication and relationships, as well as parental expectations and aspirations among parents of primary school students. Moderator effects were also examined. Through systematically searching six databases and screening papers, we included 50 independent studies involving 185 effect sizes (N = 20,043 children). Results showed a small to medium correlation between parenting self-efficacy and the multidimensional construct of home-school partnership outcomes (r = .189). The associations were stronger for education-focused parenting self-efficacy (r = .183) than general parenting self-efficacy (r = .114) and were stronger still for home-based participation (r = .248) and parental expectations and aspirations (r = .248) than school-based participation (r = .124) and parent-teacher communication/relationship (r = .090). We detected limited moderating effects of child gender, parent gender, ethnicity, sample type (general or targeted), and socio-economic status and publication bias. Overall, this meta-analysis provides evidence to support the positive relationship between parenting self-efficacy and parents’ contributions to the strength of the home-school partnership. Implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.

家庭与学校之间高质量的合作关系可以为儿童的发展、学习和幸福带来巨大的好处。数十年的研究表明,家长的自我效能感是影响家长为有效的家校合作做出贡献的关键因素。然而,在不同的研究中,这种关联的强度差异很大,总体强度仍不明确。本荟萃分析旨在研究家长的自我效能感与家长对家校合作的各方面贡献之间的关联,即小学生家长的家庭参与、学校参与、家校沟通和关系,以及家长的期望和愿望。此外,还研究了调节效应。通过系统搜索六个数据库和筛选论文,我们纳入了 50 项独立研究,涉及 185 个效应大小(N = 20,043 名儿童)。结果显示,养育自我效能感与家庭-学校伙伴关系结果的多维建构之间存在小到中等的相关性(r = 0.189)。以教育为重点的养育自我效能感(r = .183)比一般的养育自我效能感(r = .114)更强,家庭参与(r = .248)和家长期望与愿望(r = .248)比学校参与(r = .124)和家长与教师沟通/关系(r = .090)更强。我们发现儿童性别、家长性别、种族、样本类型(一般或目标)、社会经济地位和出版偏差的调节作用有限。总之,这项荟萃分析提供的证据支持了养育自我效能感与家长对家校合作关系的贡献之间的积极关系。本文还讨论了未来研究的意义和建议。
{"title":"The Associations Between Parenting Self-Efficacy and Parents’ Contributions to the Home-School Partnership Among Parents of Primary School Students: a Multilevel Meta-analysis","authors":"Tianyi Ma, Cassandra L. Tellegen, Julie Hodges, Matthew R. Sanders","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09937-3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09937-3","url":null,"abstract":"<p>High-quality partnerships between families and schools can bring enormous benefits to the development, learning, and wellbeing of children. Decades of research has identified parenting self-efficacy as a key factor influencing parents’ contributions toward effective home-school partnerships. However, the strength of this association has varied significantly across studies with the aggregated strength remaining unclear. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the associations between parenting self-efficacy and various aspects of parents’ contribution to the home-school partnership, namely home-based involvement, school-based involvement, home-school communication and relationships, as well as parental expectations and aspirations among parents of primary school students. Moderator effects were also examined. Through systematically searching six databases and screening papers, we included 50 independent studies involving 185 effect sizes (<i>N</i> = 20,043 children). Results showed a small to medium correlation between parenting self-efficacy and the multidimensional construct of home-school partnership outcomes (<i>r</i> = .189). The associations were stronger for education-focused parenting self-efficacy (<i>r</i> = .183) than general parenting self-efficacy (<i>r</i> = .114) and were stronger still for home-based participation (<i>r</i> = .248) and parental expectations and aspirations (<i>r</i> = .248) than school-based participation (<i>r</i> = .124) and parent-teacher communication/relationship (<i>r</i> = .090). We detected limited moderating effects of child gender, parent gender, ethnicity, sample type (general or targeted), and socio-economic status and publication bias. Overall, this meta-analysis provides evidence to support the positive relationship between parenting self-efficacy and parents’ contributions to the strength of the home-school partnership. Implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.\u0000</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"97 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142013901","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
Study Demands–Resources Theory: Understanding Student Well-Being in Higher Education 学习需求-资源理论:了解高等教育中的学生福祉
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-08-19 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09940-8
Arnold B. Bakker, Karina Mostert

This article reviews the literature on student well-being (burnout and engagement) and their relationships with study demands and resources, student behaviors (proactive and self-undermining study behaviors), and student outcomes in higher education. Building on research that used Job Demands–Resources and Study Demands–Resources models to investigate student well-being, we develop the Study Demands–Resources (SD–R) theory to delineate the various processes, mechanisms, and behaviors involved in student burnout and engagement. Study demands and resources have unique and combined effects on higher education students’ well-being. In addition, students can influence their own well-being and study-related outcomes by either proactively optimizing their study demands and resources or displaying self-undermining behaviors that can adversely affect their study environment. We discuss several avenues for future research, including (a) rigorous tests of SD–R propositions; (b) trait versus state effects in SD–R theory; (c) the impact of the higher education climate and lecturer influence; and (d) an expanded SD–R theory.

本文回顾了有关高等教育中学生幸福感(倦怠和参与)及其与学习需求和资源、学生行为(积极主动和自我破坏的学习行为)以及学生成果之间关系的文献。在使用 "工作需求-资源 "和 "学习需求-资源 "模型调查学生幸福感的研究基础上,我们提出了 "学习需求-资源"(SD-R)理论,以界定学生倦怠和投入所涉及的各种过程、机制和行为。学习需求和资源对高校学生的幸福感具有独特的综合影响。此外,学生可以通过主动优化学习需求和资源,或表现出对学习环境产生不利影响的自我损害行为,来影响自身的幸福感和学习相关结果。我们讨论了未来研究的几个方向,包括(a)SD-R命题的严格测试;(b)SD-R理论中的特质效应与状态效应;(c)高等教育氛围和讲师影响的影响;以及(d)扩展的SD-R理论。
{"title":"Study Demands–Resources Theory: Understanding Student Well-Being in Higher Education","authors":"Arnold B. Bakker, Karina Mostert","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09940-8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09940-8","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article reviews the literature on student well-being (burnout and engagement) and their relationships with study demands and resources, student behaviors (proactive and self-undermining study behaviors), and student outcomes in higher education. Building on research that used Job Demands–Resources and Study Demands–Resources models to investigate student well-being, we develop the Study Demands–Resources (SD–R) theory to delineate the various processes, mechanisms, and behaviors involved in student burnout and engagement. Study demands and resources have unique and combined effects on higher education students’ well-being. In addition, students can influence their own well-being and study-related outcomes by either proactively optimizing their study demands and resources or displaying self-undermining behaviors that can adversely affect their study environment. We discuss several avenues for future research, including (a) rigorous tests of SD–R propositions; (b) trait versus state effects in SD–R theory; (c) the impact of the higher education climate and lecturer influence; and (d) an expanded SD–R theory.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"54 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142002653","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 AIR and Apt-AIR Frameworks of Epistemic Performance and Growth: Reflections on Educational Theory Development 认识表现与成长的 AIR 和 Apt-AIR 框架:对教育理论发展的思考
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-08-17 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09927-5
Sarit Barzilai, Clark A. Chinn

The nurturing of learners’ ways of knowing is vital for supporting their intellectual growth and their participation in democratic knowledge societies. This paper traces the development of two interrelated theoretical frameworks that describe the nature of learners’ epistemic thinking and performance and how education can support epistemic growth: the AIR and Apt-AIR frameworks. After briefly reviewing these frameworks, we discuss seven reflections on educational theory development that stem from our experiences working on the frameworks. First, we describe how our frameworks were motivated by the goal of addressing meaningful educational challenges. Subsequently, we explain why and how we infused philosophical insights into our frameworks, and we also discuss the steps we took to increase the coherence of the frameworks with ideas from other educational psychology theories. Next, we reflect on the important role of the design of instruction and learning environments in testing and elaborating the frameworks. Equally important, we describe how our frameworks have been supported by empirical evidence and have provided an organizing structure for understanding epistemic performance exhibited in studies across diverse contexts. Finally, we discuss how the development of the frameworks has been spurred by dialogue within the research community and by the need to address emerging and pressing real-world challenges. To conclude, we highlight several important directions for future research. A common thread running through our work is the commitment to creating robust and dynamic theoretical frameworks that support the growth of learners’ epistemic performance in diverse educational contexts.

培养学习者的认知方式对于支持他们的智力成长和参与民主知识社会至关重要。本文追溯了两个相互关联的理论框架的发展历程,这两个框架描述了学习者认识论思维和表现的本质,以及教育如何支持认识论的成长:AIR 和 Apt-AIR 框架。在简要回顾了这两个框架之后,我们讨论了根据我们在这两个框架上的工作经验对教育理论发展的七点思考。首先,我们介绍了我们的框架是如何以应对有意义的教育挑战为目标的。随后,我们解释了为什么以及如何在我们的框架中注入哲学见解,我们还讨论了我们为提高框架与其他教育心理学理论观点的一致性而采取的步骤。接下来,我们思考了教学设计和学习环境在检验和阐述框架方面的重要作用。同样重要的是,我们描述了我们的框架是如何得到经验证据的支持,并为理解不同情境下的研究中表现出的认识表现提供了一个组织结构。最后,我们讨论了研究界内部的对话以及应对新出现的紧迫现实挑战的需要是如何推动这些框架的发展的。最后,我们强调了未来研究的几个重要方向。贯穿我们工作的一条共同主线是,致力于创建稳健、动态的理论框架,以支持学习者在不同教育情境中提高认识能力。
{"title":"The AIR and Apt-AIR Frameworks of Epistemic Performance and Growth: Reflections on Educational Theory Development","authors":"Sarit Barzilai, Clark A. Chinn","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09927-5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09927-5","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The nurturing of learners’ ways of knowing is vital for supporting their intellectual growth and their participation in democratic knowledge societies. This paper traces the development of two interrelated theoretical frameworks that describe the nature of learners’ epistemic thinking and performance and how education can support epistemic growth: the AIR and Apt-AIR frameworks. After briefly reviewing these frameworks, we discuss seven reflections on educational theory development that stem from our experiences working on the frameworks. First, we describe how our frameworks were motivated by the goal of addressing meaningful educational challenges. Subsequently, we explain why and how we infused philosophical insights into our frameworks, and we also discuss the steps we took to increase the coherence of the frameworks with ideas from other educational psychology theories. Next, we reflect on the important role of the design of instruction and learning environments in testing and elaborating the frameworks. Equally important, we describe how our frameworks have been supported by empirical evidence and have provided an organizing structure for understanding epistemic performance exhibited in studies across diverse contexts. Finally, we discuss how the development of the frameworks has been spurred by dialogue within the research community and by the need to address emerging and pressing real-world challenges. To conclude, we highlight several important directions for future research. A common thread running through our work is the commitment to creating robust and dynamic theoretical frameworks that support the growth of learners’ epistemic performance in diverse educational contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141998710","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
Navigating Spatial Ability for Mathematics Education: a Review and Roadmap 数学教育空间能力导航:回顾与路线图
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-08-17 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09935-5
Kelsey E. Schenck, Mitchell J. Nathan

Spatial skills can predict mathematics performance, with many researchers investigating how and why these skills are related. However, a literature review on spatial ability revealed a multiplicity of spatial taxonomies and analytical frameworks that lack convergence, presenting a confusing terrain for researchers to navigate. We expose two central challenges: (1) many of the ways spatial ability is defined and subdivided are often not based in well-evidenced theoretical and analytical frameworks, and (2) the sheer variety of spatial assessments. These challenges impede progress in designing spatial skills interventions for improving mathematics thinking based on causal principles, selecting appropriate metrics for documenting change, and analyzing and interpreting student outcome data. We offer solutions by providing a practical guide for navigating and selecting among the various major spatial taxonomies and instruments used in mathematics education research. We also identify current limitations of spatial ability research and suggest future research directions.

空间技能可以预测数学成绩,许多研究人员都在研究这些技能之间的关系和原因。然而,有关空间能力的文献综述显示,空间分类标准和分析框架五花八门,缺乏统一性,给研究人员带来了困惑。我们揭示了两个核心挑战:(1) 许多空间能力的定义和细分方式往往不是基于经过充分验证的理论和分析框架,(2) 空间评估种类繁多。这些挑战阻碍了根据因果原则设计空间技能干预措施以改善数学思维、选择适当的指标来记录变化以及分析和解释学生结果数据方面的进展。我们提供了解决方案,为数学教育研究中使用的各种主要空间分类标准和工具的导航和选择提供了实用指南。我们还指出了当前空间能力研究的局限性,并提出了未来的研究方向。
{"title":"Navigating Spatial Ability for Mathematics Education: a Review and Roadmap","authors":"Kelsey E. Schenck, Mitchell J. Nathan","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09935-5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09935-5","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Spatial skills can predict mathematics performance, with many researchers investigating how and why these skills are related. However, a literature review on spatial ability revealed a multiplicity of spatial taxonomies and analytical frameworks that lack convergence, presenting a confusing terrain for researchers to navigate. We expose two central challenges: (1) many of the ways spatial ability is defined and subdivided are often not based in well-evidenced theoretical and analytical frameworks, and (2) the sheer variety of spatial assessments. These challenges impede progress in designing spatial skills interventions for improving mathematics thinking based on causal principles, selecting appropriate metrics for documenting change, and analyzing and interpreting student outcome data. We offer solutions by providing a practical guide for navigating and selecting among the various major spatial taxonomies and instruments used in mathematics education research. We also identify current limitations of spatial ability research and suggest future research directions.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"69 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141994393","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
Motivating the Learning Process: Integrating Self-Determination Theory Into a Dynamical Systems Framework 激励学习过程:将自我决定理论纳入动态系统框架
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-08-16 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09934-6
Peter Claudius Osei, David F. Bjorklund

The complexity of modern societies necessitates that children learn highly abstract material, such as mathematics, which often conflicts with behavioral goals that are innately motivating. For instance, children’s educational success is generally evaluated based on their individual achievements, while humans are motivated to learn by engaging in socially relevant behaviors. Additionally, science-related content typically requires higher-level abstract thinking to comprehend related concepts and perform the underlying cognitive processes, whereas humans evolved primarily to monitor and manipulate the physical environment by moving within it to execute foraging and hunting behaviors. Moreover, school systems inherently prescribe top-down strategies in which teachers transfer knowledge by providing instructions to guide students' knowledge acquisition. By contrast, humans evolved to learn through bottom-up processes motivated by the learner's internal drive to explore their physical and social environment. As a consequence, skeletal cognitive competencies that evolved throughout human history create a mismatch between why children are motivated to learn and how they are expected to learn. This review adopts an evolutionary perspective to examine how the interplay between students’ internal physiological and psychological adaptations and external instructional methods of modern educational systems impacts motivation and learning. Ultimately, the review offers suggestions on how to motivate the learning process by integrating self-determination theory principles into a dynamical systems framework.

现代社会的复杂性要求儿童学习数学等高度抽象的材料,而这往往与天生具有激励作用的行为目标相冲突。例如,对儿童教育成功与否的评价通常基于他们的个人成就,而人类的学习动机则是参与社会相关行为。此外,与科学相关的内容通常需要较高层次的抽象思维来理解相关概念和执行基本的认知过程,而人类进化的主要目的是通过在物理环境中移动来执行觅食和狩猎行为,从而监控和操纵物理环境。此外,学校系统固有地规定了自上而下的策略,教师通过提供指导来传授知识,引导学生获取知识。与此相反,人类在进化过程中是通过自下而上的过程进行学习的,这种过程的动力来自于学习者探索物理和社会环境的内驱力。因此,人类历史上不断进化的骨架认知能力在儿童学习动机和学习方式之间造成了不匹配。本综述采用进化论的视角,研究学生的内在生理和心理适应能力与现代教育体系的外在教学方法之间的相互作用如何影响学习动机和学习方法。最后,本综述就如何通过将自我决定理论原则纳入动力系统框架来激励学习过程提出了建议。
{"title":"Motivating the Learning Process: Integrating Self-Determination Theory Into a Dynamical Systems Framework","authors":"Peter Claudius Osei, David F. Bjorklund","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09934-6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09934-6","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The complexity of modern societies necessitates that children learn highly abstract material, such as mathematics, which often conflicts with behavioral goals that are innately motivating. For instance, children’s educational success is generally evaluated based on their individual achievements, while humans are motivated to learn by engaging in socially relevant behaviors. Additionally, science-related content typically requires higher-level abstract thinking to comprehend related concepts and perform the underlying cognitive processes, whereas humans evolved primarily to monitor and manipulate the physical environment by moving within it to execute foraging and hunting behaviors. Moreover, school systems inherently prescribe top-down strategies in which teachers transfer knowledge by providing instructions to guide students' knowledge acquisition. By contrast, humans evolved to learn through bottom-up processes motivated by the learner's internal drive to explore their physical and social environment. As a consequence, skeletal cognitive competencies that evolved throughout human history create a mismatch between why children are motivated to learn and how they are expected to learn. This review adopts an evolutionary perspective to examine how the interplay between students’ internal physiological and psychological adaptations and external instructional methods of modern educational systems impacts motivation and learning. Ultimately, the review offers suggestions on how to motivate the learning process by integrating self-determination theory principles into a dynamical systems framework.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141992003","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 Personalized Learning by Interest Effect on Interest, Cognitive Load, Retention, and Transfer: A Meta-Analysis 个性化兴趣学习对兴趣、认知负荷、保持和迁移的影响:元分析
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-08-15 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09933-7
Lijia Lin, Xin Lin, Xiaofang Zhang, Paul Ginns

None of the existing reviews or meta-analyses have focused on personalized learning that accommodates learners’ interests. To address this issue, we conducted this meta-analysis to examine the effects of personalized learning by interest on self-reports of interest and cognitive load, retention, and transfer, as well as potential moderators of these effects. Based on 26 interest effect sizes (n = 5,335), 8 cognitive load effect sizes (n = 1,228), 46 retention effect sizes (n = 5,991), and 6 transfer effect sizes (n = 375) from 34 publications, our analysis revealed that a) personalized learning by interest had a medium-to-large effect on interest (g = 0.55), a medium-to-large effect on cognitive load (g = 0.54), a medium effect on retention (g = 0.48), and a medium effect on transfer (g = 0.36); b) the effect on interest was moderated by the diagnostic approach, grain size, and the domain, c) the effect on retention varied across learners from different continents, and d) the effect on retention was larger for quasi-experimental studies than experimental studies. Results are discussed in terms of their implications, limitations, and potential to inform future research.

现有的综述或荟萃分析都没有关注适应学习者兴趣的个性化学习。为了解决这个问题,我们进行了这项荟萃分析,以研究按兴趣进行个性化学习对兴趣自我报告、认知负荷、保持率和迁移率的影响,以及这些影响的潜在调节因素。根据 34 篇论文中的 26 个兴趣效应大小(n = 5335)、8 个认知负荷效应大小(n = 1228)、46 个保持效应大小(n = 5991)和 6 个迁移效应大小(n = 375),我们的分析表明:a) 按兴趣进行个性化学习对兴趣有中到大的影响(g = 0.55),对认知负荷有中到大的影响(g = 0.54),对保持率的影响为中等(g = 0.48),对迁移的影响为中等(g = 0.36);b) 对兴趣的影响受诊断方法、粒度和领域的调节;c) 对保持率的影响因来自不同大洲的学习者而异;d) 准实验研究对保持率的影响大于实验研究。本报告从其意义、局限性和为未来研究提供信息的潜力等方面对研究结果进行了讨论。
{"title":"The Personalized Learning by Interest Effect on Interest, Cognitive Load, Retention, and Transfer: A Meta-Analysis","authors":"Lijia Lin, Xin Lin, Xiaofang Zhang, Paul Ginns","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09933-7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09933-7","url":null,"abstract":"<p>None of the existing reviews or meta-analyses have focused on personalized learning that accommodates learners’ interests. To address this issue, we conducted this meta-analysis to examine the effects of personalized learning by interest on self-reports of interest and cognitive load, retention, and transfer, as well as potential moderators of these effects. Based on 26 interest effect sizes (<i>n</i> = 5,335), 8 cognitive load effect sizes (<i>n</i> = 1,228), 46 retention effect sizes (<i>n</i> = 5,991), and 6 transfer effect sizes (<i>n</i> = 375) from 34 publications, our analysis revealed that a) personalized learning by interest had a medium-to-large effect on interest (<i>g</i> = 0.55), a medium-to-large effect on cognitive load (<i>g</i> = 0.54), a medium effect on retention (<i>g</i> = 0.48), and a medium effect on transfer (<i>g</i> = 0.36); b) the effect on interest was moderated by the diagnostic approach, grain size, and the domain, c) the effect on retention varied across learners from different continents, and d) the effect on retention was larger for quasi-experimental studies than experimental studies. Results are discussed in terms of their implications, limitations, and potential to inform future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141986512","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
A Systematic Review of Graduate Students’ Research Motivation: Themes, Theories, and Methodologies 研究生研究动机的系统回顾:主题、理论和方法
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-08-13 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09924-8
Jiying Han, Yahui Wang

This is a systematic review of empirical studies on graduate students’ research motivation, a key factor for improving their research performance. A total of 57 articles and conference papers between 1993 and 2023 were identified through the thorough search process and quality assessment, and their research categories and themes, theories, and methodologies were synthesized. Based on this review, a Graduate Students’ Research Motivation Model (GSRMM) was constructed, highlighting three main categories: antecedents, consequences, and mediating roles of graduate students’ research motivation. The results of the study showed that manipulable antecedents have been extensively explored, but immutable antecedents, consequences, and the mediating roles of research motivation remain underexplored. Self-efficacy theory emerged as the dominant framework in the existing studies. Quantitative research design by means of self-report questionnaires dominated the current studies, which warrants a move towards alternative research measurements. This comprehensive review provides a deeper understanding of graduate students’ research motivation and also suggests new avenues for further exploration in this field.

研究生的研究动机是提高其研究绩效的关键因素,本文系统地综述了有关研究生研究动机的实证研究。通过全面的检索过程和质量评估,确定了 1993 年至 2023 年间的 57 篇文章和会议论文,并对其研究类别和主题、理论和方法进行了归纳。在此基础上,构建了研究生研究动机模型(GSRMM),突出了研究生研究动机的前因、后果和中介作用三大类。研究结果表明,可操作的前因已经得到了广泛的探讨,但不可改变的前因、后果以及研究动机的中介作用仍未得到充分的探讨。在现有的研究中,自我效能理论成为主导框架。以自我报告问卷为手段的定量研究设计在现有研究中占主导地位,因此有必要采用其他研究测量方法。这篇综合综述加深了人们对研究生研究动机的理解,同时也为该领域的进一步探索提出了新的途径。
{"title":"A Systematic Review of Graduate Students’ Research Motivation: Themes, Theories, and Methodologies","authors":"Jiying Han, Yahui Wang","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09924-8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09924-8","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is a systematic review of empirical studies on graduate students’ research motivation, a key factor for improving their research performance. A total of 57 articles and conference papers between 1993 and 2023 were identified through the thorough search process and quality assessment, and their research categories and themes, theories, and methodologies were synthesized. Based on this review, a Graduate Students’ Research Motivation Model (GSRMM) was constructed, highlighting three main categories: antecedents, consequences, and mediating roles of graduate students’ research motivation. The results of the study showed that manipulable antecedents have been extensively explored, but immutable antecedents, consequences, and the mediating roles of research motivation remain underexplored. Self-efficacy theory emerged as the dominant framework in the existing studies. Quantitative research design by means of self-report questionnaires dominated the current studies, which warrants a move towards alternative research measurements. This comprehensive review provides a deeper understanding of graduate students’ research motivation and also suggests new avenues for further exploration in this field.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"52 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141980854","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
Involving the Body to Improve Letter Knowledge and Script: an Experimental Study in French Kindergarten 让身体参与提高字母知识和书写能力:法国幼儿园实验研究
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-08-13 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09923-9
Fernando Núñez-Regueiro, Natacha Boissicat, Fanny Gimbert, Céline Pobel-Burtin, Marie-Caroline Croset, Marie-Line Bosse, Cécile Nurra

Research suggests that providing children with activities that involve using their bodies to form the shapes of letters can help them acquire pre-reading skills. Little is known, however, as to the extent to which such embodied learning interventions are superior to more traditional pencil-and-paper activities, which of specific arm or body movements are most effective, and whether this approach compensates or exacerbates the learning gap between high- and low-skilled pre-readers. Using a preregistered randomized-controlled experiment (N = 160 kindergarten students, M = 5.18 years, 54% girls), the present study assessed the educational effects of 6-week-long training sessions with increasing degrees of bodily movement integration (pencil-and-paper training vs. arm training vs. arm-body training) on five measures of letter knowledge and script. Aligning with theories of embodied cognition and cognitive load in instructional designs, results showed that integrating arm movement exercises into handwriting training bore the greatest acquisitions in pre-reading skills overall and were most beneficial to students with initially low pre-reading skills (compensatory effect against learning inequalities). Implications are drawn on the need to consolidate and replicate present findings, while highlighting their potential for supporting educational effectiveness and equity in kindergarten.

研究表明,为儿童提供用身体摆出字母形状的活动,有助于他们掌握读前技能。然而,人们对以下问题知之甚少:这种肢体学习干预在多大程度上优于传统的纸笔活动;哪些特定的手臂或身体动作最有效;以及这种方法是弥补了还是加剧了高技能和低技能学前阅读者之间的学习差距。本研究通过一项预先登记的随机对照实验(N = 160 名幼儿园学生,M = 5.18 岁,54% 为女生),评估了为期 6 周、身体动作整合程度不断提高的训练课程(纸笔训练 vs. 手臂训练 vs. 手臂-身体训练)对字母知识和脚本的五项测量的教育效果。与教学设计中的体现认知和认知负荷理论相一致,结果表明,在手写训练中融入手臂动作练习对学生的预读能力有最大的提高,对预读能力最初较低的学生也最有益(对学习不平等的补偿效应)。本研究的意义在于需要巩固和复制本研究成果,同时强调其在支持幼儿园教育有效性和公平性方面的潜力。
{"title":"Involving the Body to Improve Letter Knowledge and Script: an Experimental Study in French Kindergarten","authors":"Fernando Núñez-Regueiro, Natacha Boissicat, Fanny Gimbert, Céline Pobel-Burtin, Marie-Caroline Croset, Marie-Line Bosse, Cécile Nurra","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09923-9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09923-9","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Research suggests that providing children with activities that involve using their bodies to form the shapes of letters can help them acquire pre-reading skills. Little is known, however, as to the extent to which such embodied learning interventions are superior to more traditional pencil-and-paper activities, which of specific arm or body movements are most effective, and whether this approach compensates or exacerbates the learning gap between high- and low-skilled pre-readers. Using a preregistered randomized-controlled experiment (<i>N</i> = 160 kindergarten students, <i>M</i> = 5.18 years, 54% girls), the present study assessed the educational effects of 6-week-long training sessions with increasing degrees of bodily movement integration (pencil-and-paper training vs. arm training vs. arm-body training) on five measures of letter knowledge and script. Aligning with theories of embodied cognition and cognitive load in instructional designs, results showed that integrating arm movement exercises into handwriting training bore the greatest acquisitions in pre-reading skills overall and were most beneficial to students with initially low pre-reading skills (compensatory effect against learning inequalities). Implications are drawn on the need to consolidate and replicate present findings, while highlighting their potential for supporting educational effectiveness and equity in kindergarten.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141974310","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
期刊
Educational Psychology Review
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
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
×
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
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