Pub Date : 2024-07-05DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09911-z
Doug Lombardi, Gale M. Sinatra, Janelle M. Bailey, Lucas P. Butler
Our technological, information-rich society thrives because of scientific thinking. However, a comprehensive theory of the development of scientific thinking remains elusive. Building on previous theoretical and empirical work in conceptual change, the role of credibility and plausibility in evaluating scientific evidence and claims, science engagement, active learning in STEM education, and the development of empirical thinking, we chart a pathway toward a comprehensive theory of the development of scientific thinking as an example of theory building in action. We detail the structural similarity and progressive transformation of our models and perspectives, highlighting factors for incorporation into a novel theory. This theory will focus on beneficial outcomes of a more collaborative scientific community and increasing scientific literacy through deeper science understanding for all people.
{"title":"Seeking a Comprehensive Theory About the Development of Scientific Thinking","authors":"Doug Lombardi, Gale M. Sinatra, Janelle M. Bailey, Lucas P. Butler","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09911-z","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09911-z","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Our technological, information-rich society thrives because of scientific thinking. However, a comprehensive theory of the development of scientific thinking remains elusive. Building on previous theoretical and empirical work in conceptual change, the role of credibility and plausibility in evaluating scientific evidence and claims, science engagement, active learning in STEM education, and the development of empirical thinking, we chart a pathway toward a comprehensive theory of the development of scientific thinking as an example of theory building in action. We detail the structural similarity and progressive transformation of our models and perspectives, highlighting factors for incorporation into a novel theory. This theory will focus on beneficial outcomes of a more collaborative scientific community and increasing scientific literacy through deeper science understanding for all people.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141545966","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 : 2024-07-05DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09913-x
Hannah L. Robinson, Sarah E. Rose, Jade M. Elliott, Romina A. Vivaldi
Teachers frequently use humour, but it is unclear how this affects the academic experiences and psychosocial development of students. There is sparsity in the literature regarding the impact of teachers’ humour on adolescent students. Teachers and the use of humour in the classroom have the potential to foster healthy development of social and academic skills during this key formative stage of maturation, but equally may be detrimental. This scoping review aimed to determine how and why teachers used humour in the classrooms of students aged 11-18, and the effect humour may have on students’ educational experiences. The Joanna Briggs methodological framework and PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews checklist were used. The narrative synthesis generated six themes from 43 empirical papers. Many studies have considered humour as a single construct, reporting improved classroom management and students’ learning processes. However, other reports have suggested that humour use could lead to a loss of class control and for important information to be lost. Studies considering specific humour styles have identified affiliative humour as increasing engagement in deeper thinking. However, aggressive and course-related humour have reported mixed effects on educational experiences. This review identifies the humour styles and sub-styles reported in the sparse literature. It also highlights the lack of a comprehensive humour styles measure that adequately captures humour use and perceptions in teachers of adolescents and, importantly, how teachers’ humour is perceived by this population. Such a tool is vital to enable understanding of how teaching humour styles may directly affect adolescents’ educational experiences.
{"title":"Teachers’ Humour Use in the Classroom: A Scoping Review","authors":"Hannah L. Robinson, Sarah E. Rose, Jade M. Elliott, Romina A. Vivaldi","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09913-x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09913-x","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Teachers frequently use humour, but it is unclear how this affects the academic experiences and psychosocial development of students. There is sparsity in the literature regarding the impact of teachers’ humour on adolescent students. Teachers and the use of humour in the classroom have the potential to foster healthy development of social and academic skills during this key formative stage of maturation, but equally may be detrimental. This scoping review aimed to determine how and why teachers used humour in the classrooms of students aged 11-18, and the effect humour may have on students’ educational experiences. The Joanna Briggs methodological framework and PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews checklist were used. The narrative synthesis generated six themes from 43 empirical papers. Many studies have considered humour as a single construct, reporting improved classroom management and students’ learning processes. However, other reports have suggested that humour use could lead to a loss of class control and for important information to be lost. Studies considering specific humour styles have identified affiliative humour as increasing engagement in deeper thinking. However, aggressive and course-related humour have reported mixed effects on educational experiences. This review identifies the humour styles and sub-styles reported in the sparse literature. It also highlights the lack of a comprehensive humour styles measure that adequately captures humour use and perceptions in teachers of adolescents and, importantly, how teachers’ humour is perceived by this population. Such a tool is vital to enable understanding of how teaching humour styles may directly affect adolescents’ educational experiences.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141545967","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 : 2024-07-04DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09905-x
Fernando Núñez-Regueiro
Self-determination theory (SDT) proposes to explain the relations between motivational states and human development. In education, a central tenet of the theory is that experiencing autonomous motivation in school activities (i.e., genuine pleasure and enjoyment) fosters optimal learning processes, whereas experiencing controlled motivation (i.e., pressure from social or instrumental incentives) undermines them. Although the theory is well established empirically, little is known about how these motivations combine in their effects on achievement at school (interactions), and whether their effects depend on the intensity of motivations (nonlinearities) or on the context of study (national differences). Applying cubic response surface analysis to the TIMSS 2019 dataset on mathematics (N = 152,825 8th grade students from 37 countries), as well as replication data (N = 169,269 8th grade students from TIMSS 2015, N = 270 college students from SDT data), this study uncovers the existence of various kinds of nonlinear-interactive motivational processes in achievement, three of which systematically account for cross-national differences. In substance, these findings demonstrate that predictions based on SDT are close to universally true (93% of students), although they may not generalize well to extreme states of autonomous or controlled motivation (nonlinear and interactive processes). Implications for research and interventions on motivational processes are discussed.
{"title":"Cubic Relations of Autonomous and Controlled Motivation to Achievement: A Cross-National Validation of Self-Determination Theory Using Response Surface Analysis","authors":"Fernando Núñez-Regueiro","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09905-x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09905-x","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Self-determination theory (SDT) proposes to explain the relations between motivational states and human development. In education, a central tenet of the theory is that experiencing autonomous motivation in school activities (i.e., genuine pleasure and enjoyment) fosters optimal learning processes, whereas experiencing controlled motivation (i.e., pressure from social or instrumental incentives) undermines them. Although the theory is well established empirically, little is known about how these motivations combine in their effects on achievement at school (interactions), and whether their effects depend on the intensity of motivations (nonlinearities) or on the context of study (national differences). Applying cubic response surface analysis to the TIMSS 2019 dataset on mathematics (<i>N</i> = 152,825 8th grade students from 37 countries), as well as replication data (<i>N</i> = 169,269 8th grade students from TIMSS 2015, <i>N</i> = 270 college students from SDT data), this study uncovers the existence of various kinds of nonlinear-interactive motivational processes in achievement, three of which systematically account for cross-national differences. In substance, these findings demonstrate that predictions based on SDT are close to universally true (93% of students), although they may not generalize well to extreme states of autonomous or controlled motivation (nonlinear and interactive processes). Implications for research and interventions on motivational processes are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141521935","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 : 2024-07-03DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09908-8
Alyssa P. Lawson, Amedee Marchand Martella, Kristen LaBonte, Cynthia Y. Delgado, Fangzheng Zhao, Justin A. Gluck, Mitchell E. Munns, Ashleigh Wells LeRoy, Richard E. Mayer
A substantial amount of media comparison research has been conducted in the last decade to investigate whether students learn Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) content better in immersive virtual reality (IVR) or more traditional learning environments. However, a thorough review of the design and implementation of conventional and IVR conditions in media comparison studies has not been conducted to examine the extent to which specific affordances of IVR can be pinpointed as the causal factor in enhancing learning. The present review filled this gap in the literature by examining the degree to which conventional and IVR conditions have been controlled on instructional methods and content within the K-12 and higher education STEM literature base. Thirty-eight published journal articles, conference proceedings, and dissertations related to IVR comparison studies in STEM education between the years 2013 and 2022 were coded according to 15 categories. These categories allowed for the extraction of information on the instructional methods and content characteristics of the conventional and IVR conditions to determine the degree of control within each experimental comparison. Results indicated only 26% of all comparisons examined between an IVR and conventional condition were fully controlled on five key control criteria. Moreover, 40% of the comparisons had at least one confound related to instructional method and content. When looking at the outcomes of the studies, it was difficult to gather a clear picture of the benefits or pitfalls of IVR when much of the literature was confounded and/or lacked sufficient information to determine if the conditions were controlled on key variables. Implications and recommendations for future IVR comparison research are discussed.
{"title":"Confounded or Controlled? A Systematic Review of Media Comparison Studies Involving Immersive Virtual Reality for STEM Education","authors":"Alyssa P. Lawson, Amedee Marchand Martella, Kristen LaBonte, Cynthia Y. Delgado, Fangzheng Zhao, Justin A. Gluck, Mitchell E. Munns, Ashleigh Wells LeRoy, Richard E. Mayer","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09908-8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09908-8","url":null,"abstract":"<p>A substantial amount of media comparison research has been conducted in the last decade to investigate whether students learn Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) content better in immersive virtual reality (IVR) or more traditional learning environments. However, a thorough review of the design and implementation of conventional and IVR conditions in media comparison studies has not been conducted to examine the extent to which specific affordances of IVR can be pinpointed as the causal factor in enhancing learning. The present review filled this gap in the literature by examining the degree to which conventional and IVR conditions have been controlled on instructional methods and content within the K-12 and higher education STEM literature base. Thirty-eight published journal articles, conference proceedings, and dissertations related to IVR comparison studies in STEM education between the years 2013 and 2022 were coded according to 15 categories. These categories allowed for the extraction of information on the instructional methods and content characteristics of the conventional and IVR conditions to determine the degree of control within each experimental comparison. Results indicated only 26% of all comparisons examined between an IVR and conventional condition were fully controlled on five key control criteria. Moreover, 40% of the comparisons had at least one confound related to instructional method and content. When looking at the outcomes of the studies, it was difficult to gather a clear picture of the benefits or pitfalls of IVR when much of the literature was confounded and/or lacked sufficient information to determine if the conditions were controlled on key variables. Implications and recommendations for future IVR comparison research are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141495882","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 : 2024-07-03DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09906-w
Sandra Liliana Camargo Salamanca, Andy Parra-Martínez, Ammi Chang, Yukiko Maeda, Anne Traynor
This meta-analysis explores the effect of using scoring rubrics on self-efficacy and self-regulation in K-16 formal learning settings and its potential moderators. From the literature, we identified 14 relevant experimental or quasi-experimental primary studies conducted with a total of 2793 students. We retrieved 17 effect sizes for self-efficacy and 18 effect sizes for self-regulation outcomes from the primary studies. Rubric use has a statistically significant moderate to large positive effect on students’ self-efficacy (Hedges’ g = 0.39) and self-regulation (Hedges’ g = 1.00). Large within- and -between study variability of effect sizes is common: self-efficacy (Hedges’ g: −.06; 2.47) and self-regulation (Hedges’ g: −1.17; 3.30). We found no significant moderation of the effect of rubric use by students’ level of education, providing feedback, or instruction using the rubric, whereas there is evidence of an effect of rubrics on self-efficacy and self-regulation, variability of theoretical approaches, measures, and implementation quality raise questions about best practices for rubric development and use.
本荟萃分析探讨了在 K-16 正规学习环境中使用评分标准对自我效能感和自我调节的影响及其潜在的调节因素。我们从文献中确定了 14 项相关的实验或准实验性初步研究,研究对象为 2793 名学生。我们从主要研究中检索到了 17 个自我效能的效应大小和 18 个自我调节结果的效应大小。从统计学角度看,使用评分标准对学生的自我效能感(Hedges' g = 0.39)和自我调节(Hedges' g = 1.00)具有显著的中度到高度的积极影响。在自我效能(Hedges' g:-.06;2.47)和自我调节(Hedges' g:-1.17;3.30)方面,研究内部和研究之间的效应大小差异较大。我们发现,学生的受教育程度、提供反馈或使用评分标准进行指导对使用评分标准的效果没有明显的调节作用,虽然有证据表明评分标准对自我效能感和自我调节有影响,但理论方法、测量方法和实施质量的差异对评分标准开发和使用的最佳实践提出了质疑。
{"title":"The Effect of Scoring Rubrics Use on Self-Efficacy and Self-Regulation","authors":"Sandra Liliana Camargo Salamanca, Andy Parra-Martínez, Ammi Chang, Yukiko Maeda, Anne Traynor","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09906-w","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09906-w","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This meta-analysis explores the effect of using scoring rubrics on self-efficacy and self-regulation in K-16 formal learning settings and its potential moderators. From the literature, we identified 14 relevant experimental or quasi-experimental primary studies conducted with a total of 2793 students. We retrieved 17 effect sizes for self-efficacy and 18 effect sizes for self-regulation outcomes from the primary studies. Rubric use has a statistically significant moderate to large positive effect on students’ self-efficacy (Hedges’ <i>g</i> = 0.39) and self-regulation (Hedges’ <i>g</i> = 1.00). Large within- and -between study variability of effect sizes is common: self-efficacy (Hedges’ <i>g:</i> −.06; 2.47) and self-regulation (Hedges’ <i>g</i>: −1.17; 3.30). We found no significant moderation of the effect of rubric use by students’ level of education, providing feedback, or instruction using the rubric, whereas there is evidence of an effect of rubrics on self-efficacy and self-regulation, variability of theoretical approaches, measures, and implementation quality raise questions about best practices for rubric development and use.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"63 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141495935","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 : 2024-07-02DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09907-9
Cody Ding
In the article It’s Just an Observation, Robinson and Wainer (Educational Psychology Review 35, Robinson, D., & Wainer, H. (2023). It’s just an observation. Educational Psychology Review, 35(83), Published online: 14 August, 2023) lamented that educational psychology is moving toward the dark side of the quality continuum, with fewer intervention studies and randomized controlled trials and a tendency to make causal inferences based on more armchair research using observational data. This paper discussed the challenges of making causal inferences, even with intervention studies and randomized controlled trials. We argued the usefulness of causal assumptions and modeling based on observational data regarding causal discovery while acknowledging their limitations. More importantly, the research rigor can be achieved in experimental or intervention studies as well as in studies using observational data. Showing favoritism could also taint our field by limiting our perspectives, stifling creativity, and diminishing scholarly variety. We should not allow the undue overinterpretation of correlational evidence to undermine the entire field of observational studies.
{"title":"Desire to Find Causal Relations: Response to Robinson and Wainer’s (2023) Reflection on the Field—It’s Just an Observation","authors":"Cody Ding","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09907-9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09907-9","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In the article <i>It’s Just an Observation</i>, Robinson and Wainer (Educational Psychology Review 35, Robinson, D., & Wainer, H. (2023). It’s just an observation. Educational Psychology Review, 35(83), Published online: 14 August, 2023) lamented that educational psychology is moving toward the dark side of the quality continuum, with fewer intervention studies and randomized controlled trials and a tendency to make causal inferences based on more armchair research using observational data. This paper discussed the challenges of making causal inferences, even with intervention studies and randomized controlled trials. We argued the usefulness of causal assumptions and modeling based on observational data regarding causal discovery while acknowledging their limitations. More importantly, the research rigor can be achieved in experimental or intervention studies as well as in studies using observational data. Showing favoritism could also taint our field by limiting our perspectives, stifling creativity, and diminishing scholarly variety. We should not allow the undue overinterpretation of correlational evidence to undermine the entire field of observational studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141489542","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 : 2024-06-28DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09910-0
Wenjing Li, Ziyi Kuang, Xiaoxue Leng, Richard E. Mayer, Fuxing Wang
Although gesturing onscreen instructors are widely included in video lectures, it is still unclear whether, when, and how they are conducive to learning. To clarify this issue, we conducted a set of three-level meta-analyses of 662 effect sizes from 83 articles, spanning Web of Science, PsycINFO, ERIC, Education Research Complete, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, and Google Scholar up to March 2024. We included randomized controlled trials of gesturing instructors in multimedia learning, measuring retention test score, transfer test score, fixation time, fixation count, cognitive load, and/or social perception across all languages of publication. Funnel plot and Egger sandwich test were used to assess risk of bias. Results showed that adding gesturing instructors improved retention (g = 0.28, 95% CI:[0.19,0.37]) and transfer test scores (g = 0.31, 95% CI:[0.21,0.41]), yielding an embodiment effect. This effect was stronger when the instructor displayed deictic, metaphorical, or a mixture of multiple gestures; when the instructor in the control condition was not visible; when the lecture was learner-paced and longer. Moreover, it increased learners’ social connection ratings and eye fixation time and count on core learning material (but only when deictic gestures were used). Thus, gesturing onscreen instructors may promote learning by social and cognitive paths, deepening our understanding of the role of gesturing onscreen instructors in multimedia learning and providing guidance for designing effective video lectures. More studies with clear experimental descriptions and eye-tracking studies are needed.
尽管视频讲座中广泛使用了屏幕上的教师手势,但这些手势是否、何时以及如何有助于学习仍不清楚。为了澄清这一问题,我们对截至 2024 年 3 月的 83 篇文章中的 662 个效应大小进行了三级荟萃分析,这些文章涵盖了 Web of Science、PsycINFO、ERIC、Education Research Complete、ProQuest Dissertations & Theses 和 Google Scholar。我们纳入了多媒体学习中手势指导的随机对照试验,这些试验测量了所有语言出版物中的保持测试得分、迁移测试得分、固定时间、固定次数、认知负荷和/或社会感知。采用漏斗图和 Egger 夹心测试评估偏倚风险。结果表明,增加手势指导能提高保留率(g = 0.28,95% CI:[0.19,0.37])和迁移测试得分(g = 0.31,95% CI:[0.21,0.41]),产生了体现效应。当讲师展示的手势是指代性的、隐喻性的或多种手势的混合体时;当对照条件中的讲师不可见时;当讲课节奏是学习者节奏且时间较长时,这种效应更强。此外,手势还能增加学习者的社会联系评分,以及眼睛停留在核心学习材料上的时间和次数(但仅限于使用了指代手势的情况)。因此,屏幕手势指导可以通过社会和认知路径促进学习,从而加深我们对屏幕手势指导在多媒体学习中的作用的理解,并为设计有效的视频讲座提供指导。还需要更多具有明确实验描述的研究和眼动追踪研究。
{"title":"Role of Gesturing Onscreen Instructors in Video Lectures: A Set of Three-level Meta-analyses on the Embodiment Effect","authors":"Wenjing Li, Ziyi Kuang, Xiaoxue Leng, Richard E. Mayer, Fuxing Wang","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09910-0","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09910-0","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Although gesturing onscreen instructors are widely included in video lectures, it is still unclear whether, when, and how they are conducive to learning. To clarify this issue, we conducted a set of three-level meta-analyses of 662 effect sizes from 83 articles, spanning Web of Science, PsycINFO, ERIC, Education Research Complete, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, and Google Scholar up to March 2024. We included randomized controlled trials of gesturing instructors in multimedia learning, measuring retention test score, transfer test score, fixation time, fixation count, cognitive load, and/or social perception across all languages of publication. Funnel plot and Egger sandwich test were used to assess risk of bias. Results showed that adding gesturing instructors improved retention (<i>g</i> = 0.28, 95% CI:[0.19,0.37]) and transfer test scores (<i>g</i> = 0.31, 95% CI:[0.21,0.41]), yielding an <i>embodiment effect</i>. This effect was stronger when the instructor displayed deictic, metaphorical, or a mixture of multiple gestures; when the instructor in the control condition was not visible; when the lecture was learner-paced and longer. Moreover, it increased learners’ social connection ratings and eye fixation time and count on core learning material (but only when deictic gestures were used). Thus, gesturing onscreen instructors may promote learning by social and cognitive paths, deepening our understanding of the role of gesturing onscreen instructors in multimedia learning and providing guidance for designing effective video lectures. More studies with clear experimental descriptions and eye-tracking studies are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"67 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141462485","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 : 2024-06-26DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09903-z
Louise David, Felicitas Biwer, Martine Baars, Lisette Wijnia, Fred Paas, Anique de Bruin
Accurately monitoring one’s learning processes during self-regulated learning depends on using the right cues, one of which could be perceived mental effort. A meta-analysis by Baars et al. (2020) found a negative association between mental effort and monitoring judgments (r = -.35), suggesting that the amount of mental effort experienced during a learning task is usually negatively correlated with learners’ perception of learning. However, it is unclear how monitoring judgments and perceptions of mental effort relate to learning outcomes. To examine if perceived mental effort is a diagnostic cue for learning outcomes, and whether monitoring judgments mediate this relationship, we employed a meta-analytic structural equation model. Results indicated a negative, moderate association between perceived mental effort and monitoring judgments (β = -.19), a positive, large association between monitoring judgments and learning outcomes (β = .29), and a negative, moderate indirect association between perceived mental effort and learning outcomes (β = -.05), which was mediated by monitoring judgments. Our subgroup analysis did not reveal any significant differences across moderators potentially due to the limited number of studies included per moderator category. Findings suggest that when learners perceive higher levels of mental effort, they exhibit lower learning (confidence) judgments, which relates to lower actual learning outcomes. Thus, learners seem to use perceived mental effort as a cue to judge their learning while perceived mental effort only indirectly relates to actual learning outcomes.
{"title":"The Relation Between Perceived Mental Effort, Monitoring Judgments, and Learning Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis","authors":"Louise David, Felicitas Biwer, Martine Baars, Lisette Wijnia, Fred Paas, Anique de Bruin","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09903-z","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09903-z","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Accurately monitoring one’s learning processes during self-regulated learning depends on using the right cues, one of which could be perceived mental effort. A meta-analysis by Baars et al. (2020) found a negative association between mental effort and monitoring judgments (<i>r</i> = -.35), suggesting that the amount of mental effort experienced during a learning task is usually negatively correlated with learners’ perception of learning. However, it is unclear how monitoring judgments and perceptions of mental effort relate to learning outcomes. To examine if perceived mental effort is a diagnostic cue for learning outcomes, and whether monitoring judgments mediate this relationship, we employed a meta-analytic structural equation model. Results indicated a negative, moderate association between perceived mental effort and monitoring judgments (β = -.19), a positive, large association between monitoring judgments and learning outcomes <i>(</i>β = .29), and a negative, moderate indirect association between perceived mental effort and learning outcomes (β = -.05), which was mediated by monitoring judgments. Our subgroup analysis did not reveal any significant differences across moderators potentially due to the limited number of studies included per moderator category. Findings suggest that when learners perceive higher levels of mental effort, they exhibit lower learning (confidence) judgments, which relates to lower actual learning outcomes. Thus, learners seem to use perceived mental effort as a cue to judge their learning while perceived mental effort only indirectly relates to actual learning outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141453117","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 : 2024-06-22DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09895-w
Birgit Brucker, Georg Pardi, Fabienne Uehlin, Laura Moosmann, Martin Lachmair, Marc Halfmann, Peter Gerjets
Virtual reality (VR) applications are developing rapidly, becoming more and more affordable, and offer various advantages for learning contexts. Dynamic visualizations are generally suitable for depicting continuous processes (e.g., different movement patterns), and particularly dynamic virtual 3D-objects can provide different perspectives on the movements. The present study investigated through a low immersive (desktop “VR”, Study 1) and a high immersive virtual environment (immersive VR; Study 2) the effectiveness of different interaction formats to view 3D-objects from different perspectives. Participants controlled either the orientation of the 3D-objects (Study 1, mouse interaction; Study 2, hand interaction via VR controllers) or their viewpoint in relation to the 3D-objects (Study 1, camera position; Study 2, position of participants’ own body). Additionally, the moderating influence of learners’ visuospatial ability was addressed. Dependent variables were pictorial recognition (easy, medium, difficult), factual knowledge, presence, and motion sickness. Results showed that higher-visuospatial-ability learners outperformed lower-visuospatial-ability learners. In Study 1, higher-visuospatial-ability learners showed higher recognition performance (difficult items) by controlling the camera position, whereas lower-visuospatial-ability learners suffered from this interaction format. In Study 2, higher-visuospatial-ability learners achieved better recognition performance (easy items) by controlling the 3D-models, whereas lower-visuospatial-ability learners tended to profit from moving around the 3D-objects (medium items). The immersive VR yielded more presence and higher motion sickness. This study clearly shows that different interaction formats to view 3D-objects from multiple perspectives in Desktop-VR are not transferable on a one-to-one basis into immersive VR. The results and implications for the design of virtual learning environments are discussed.
{"title":"How Learners’ Visuospatial Ability and Different Ways of Changing the Perspective Influence Learning About Movements in Desktop and Immersive Virtual Reality Environments","authors":"Birgit Brucker, Georg Pardi, Fabienne Uehlin, Laura Moosmann, Martin Lachmair, Marc Halfmann, Peter Gerjets","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09895-w","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09895-w","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Virtual reality (VR) applications are developing rapidly, becoming more and more affordable, and offer various advantages for learning contexts. Dynamic visualizations are generally suitable for depicting continuous processes (e.g., different movement patterns), and particularly dynamic virtual 3D-objects can provide different perspectives on the movements. The present study investigated through a low immersive (desktop “VR”, Study 1) and a high immersive virtual environment (immersive VR; Study 2) the effectiveness of different interaction formats to view 3D-objects from different perspectives. Participants controlled either the orientation of the 3D-objects (Study 1, mouse interaction; Study 2, hand interaction via VR controllers) or their viewpoint in relation to the 3D-objects (Study 1, camera position; Study 2, position of participants’ own body). Additionally, the moderating influence of learners’ visuospatial ability was addressed. Dependent variables were pictorial recognition (easy, medium, difficult), factual knowledge, presence, and motion sickness. Results showed that higher-visuospatial-ability learners outperformed lower-visuospatial-ability learners. In Study 1, higher-visuospatial-ability learners showed higher recognition performance (difficult items) by controlling the camera position, whereas lower-visuospatial-ability learners suffered from this interaction format. In Study 2, higher-visuospatial-ability learners achieved better recognition performance (easy items) by controlling the 3D-models, whereas lower-visuospatial-ability learners tended to profit from moving around the 3D-objects (medium items). The immersive VR yielded more presence and higher motion sickness. This study clearly shows that different interaction formats to view 3D-objects from multiple perspectives in Desktop-VR are not transferable on a one-to-one basis into immersive VR. The results and implications for the design of virtual learning environments are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141439809","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 : 2024-06-15DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09902-0
Roman Abel, Anique de Bruin, Erdem Onan, Julian Roelle
Distinguishing easily confusable categories requires learners to detect their predictive differences. Interleaved sequences — switching between categories — help learners to detect such differences. Nonetheless, learners prefer to block — switching within a category — to detect commonalities. Across two 2 × 2-factorial experiments, we investigated why learners scarcely engage in interleaving when learning confusable categories. In Experiment 1 (N = 190), we investigated the role of the utility value of being able to distinguish confusable mushroom doubles on their spontaneous study sequence choices and of the conditional knowledge component that for distinguishing, the detection of differences (between the doubles) matters. In Experiment 2 (N = 134), we again investigated the role of the latter and additionally of the conditional knowledge component that interleaving highlights differences. Results showed that combining two factors — increasing the utility value of distinguishing and informing learners that for distinguishing, the detection of differences matters — fostered learners’ use of interleaving. In conclusion, learners are more aware that interleaving highlights differences than previously thought. Nonetheless, learners prefer blocking because they do not recognize the utility value of distinguishing, and they lack the conditional knowledge that distinguishing requires finding predictive differences. Their blocked study sequence choices reflect a deliberate investment of effort to find commonalities rather than just avoiding effort. To make learners shift their effort allocation from finding commonalities to finding differences and engage them in spontaneous interleaving, we recommend highlighting the utility value of distinguishing and informing learners about the importance of finding differences for distinguishing.
{"title":"Why Do Learners (Under)Utilize Interleaving in Learning Confusable Categories? The Role of Metastrategic Knowledge and Utility Value of Distinguishing","authors":"Roman Abel, Anique de Bruin, Erdem Onan, Julian Roelle","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09902-0","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09902-0","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Distinguishing easily confusable categories requires learners to detect their predictive differences. Interleaved sequences — switching between categories — help learners to detect such differences. Nonetheless, learners prefer to block — switching within a category — to detect commonalities. Across two 2 × 2-factorial experiments, we investigated why learners scarcely engage in interleaving when learning confusable categories. In Experiment 1 (<i>N</i> = 190), we investigated the role of the utility value of being able to distinguish confusable mushroom doubles on their spontaneous study sequence choices and of the conditional knowledge component that for distinguishing, the detection of differences (between the doubles) matters. In Experiment 2 (<i>N</i> = 134), we again investigated the role of the latter and additionally of the conditional knowledge component that interleaving highlights differences. Results showed that combining two factors — increasing the utility value of distinguishing and informing learners that for distinguishing, the detection of differences matters — fostered learners’ use of interleaving. In conclusion, learners are more aware that interleaving highlights differences than previously thought. Nonetheless, learners prefer blocking because they do not recognize the utility value of distinguishing, and they lack the conditional knowledge that distinguishing requires finding predictive differences. Their blocked study sequence choices reflect a deliberate investment of effort to find commonalities rather than just avoiding effort. To make learners shift their effort allocation from finding commonalities to finding differences and engage them in spontaneous interleaving, we recommend highlighting the utility value of distinguishing and informing learners about the importance of finding differences for distinguishing.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"2014 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141326882","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}