首页 > 最新文献

Educational Psychology Review最新文献

英文 中文
Seeking a Comprehensive Theory About the Development of Scientific Thinking 寻求科学思维发展的综合理论
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-07-05 DOI: 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.

我们这个科技发达、信息丰富的社会因科学思维而繁荣。然而,关于科学思维发展的全面理论仍未形成。基于之前在概念变化、可信度和可信性在评估科学证据和主张中的作用、科学参与、STEM 教育中的主动学习以及实证思维的发展等方面的理论和实证工作,我们描绘了一条通往科学思维发展综合理论的道路,以此作为理论建设行动的范例。我们详细介绍了我们的模型和观点在结构上的相似性和逐步转变,强调了纳入新理论的因素。该理论将重点关注一个更具协作性的科学界的有益成果,以及通过加深所有人对科学的理解来提高科学素养。
{"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}
引用次数: 0
Teachers’ Humour Use in the Classroom: A Scoping Review 教师在课堂上使用幽默:范围审查
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-07-05 DOI: 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.

教师经常使用幽默,但这对学生的学习经历和社会心理发展有何影响尚不清楚。有关教师的幽默对青少年学生的影响的文献很少。在这一关键的成长阶段,教师和课堂幽默的使用有可能促进学生社交和学习技能的健康发展,但同样也可能带来不利影响。本次范围界定研究旨在确定教师在 11-18 岁学生课堂上使用幽默的方式和原因,以及幽默可能对学生教育经历产生的影响。研究采用了乔安娜-布里格斯(Joanna Briggs)方法框架和 PRISMA 扩展范围综述清单。叙事综述从 43 篇实证论文中归纳出六个主题。许多研究将幽默视为一个单一的概念,报告了课堂管理和学生学习过程的改善情况。但也有其他报告指出,使用幽默可能会导致课堂失控,丢失重要信息。对特定幽默风格的研究发现,隶属性幽默能提高学生对更深层次问题的思考。然而,攻击性幽默和与课程相关的幽默对教育体验的影响不一。本综述指出了稀少文献中报道的幽默风格和子风格。它还强调了目前还缺乏一种全面的幽默风格测量工具,能够充分反映青少年教师对幽默的使用和看法,更重要的是,这种测量工具还不能反映青少年对教师幽默的看法。这种工具对于了解教学幽默风格如何直接影响青少年的教育体验至关重要。
{"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}
引用次数: 0
Cubic Relations of Autonomous and Controlled Motivation to Achievement: A Cross-National Validation of Self-Determination Theory Using Response Surface Analysis 自主动机和受控动机与成就的立方关系:利用响应面分析法对自我决定理论进行跨国验证
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-07-04 DOI: 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.

自我决定理论(SDT)旨在解释动机状态与人类发展之间的关系。在教育领域,该理论的一个核心原则是,在学校活动中体验自主动机(即真正的快乐和享受)能促进最佳学习过程,而体验受控动机(即来自社会或工具性激励的压力)则会破坏学习过程。虽然这一理论在实证研究中已得到充分证实,但人们对这些动机如何结合在一起对学习成绩产生影响(相互作用),以及它们的影响是否取决于动机的强度(非线性)或学习环境(国家差异)却知之甚少。本研究对 TIMSS 2019 的数学数据集(来自 37 个国家的 152,825 名八年级学生)以及复制数据(来自 TIMSS 2015 的 169,269 名八年级学生,来自 SDT 数据的 270 名大学生)进行了立方响应面分析,发现了成绩中存在的各种非线性-交互动机过程,其中三种系统地解释了跨国差异。实质上,这些研究结果表明,基于 SDT 的预测接近普遍真实(93% 的学生),尽管它们可能无法很好地概括自主或受控动机的极端状态(非线性和交互过程)。本文讨论了对动机过程的研究和干预的意义。
{"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}
引用次数: 0
Confounded or Controlled? A Systematic Review of Media Comparison Studies Involving Immersive Virtual Reality for STEM Education 混淆还是控制?对涉及 STEM 教育的沉浸式虚拟现实技术的媒体比较研究的系统回顾
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-07-03 DOI: 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.

在过去的十年中,已经开展了大量的媒体对比研究,以调查学生在身临其境的虚拟现实(IVR)或更传统的学习环境中学习科学、技术、工程和数学(STEM)内容的效果是否更好。然而,在媒体对比研究中,还没有对传统和 IVR 条件的设计和实施进行全面回顾,以研究 IVR 的特定承受能力在多大程度上可以被确定为促进学习的因果因素。本综述填补了这一文献空白,研究了在 K-12 和高等教育科学、技术和工程学文献库中,常规和 IVR 条件对教学方法和内容的控制程度。对2013年至2022年期间发表的38篇与STEM教育中IVR对比研究相关的期刊论文、会议论文集和学位论文按照15个类别进行了编码。通过这些类别,可以提取有关传统和 IVR 条件下的教学方法和内容特征的信息,从而确定每个实验对比中的控制程度。结果表明,在所有 IVR 与传统条件的对比中,只有 26% 的对比在五个关键控制标准上得到了完全控制。此外,40% 的对比至少有一项与教学方法和内容有关。在研究结果方面,由于大部分文献存在混淆和/或缺乏足够的信息来确定是否对关键变量进行了控制,因此很难清楚地了解 IVR 的益处或缺陷。本文讨论了未来 IVR 对比研究的意义和建议。
{"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}
引用次数: 0
The Effect of Scoring Rubrics Use on Self-Efficacy and Self-Regulation 使用评分标准对自我效能和自我调节的影响
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-07-03 DOI: 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}
引用次数: 0
Desire to Find Causal Relations: Response to Robinson and Wainer’s (2023) Reflection on the Field—It’s Just an Observation 寻找因果关系的愿望:对罗宾逊和韦纳(2023)《实地反思--这只是一种观察》一文的回应
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-07-02 DOI: 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.

在《这只是一种观察》一文中,罗宾逊和韦纳(《教育心理学评论》第 35 期,罗宾逊,D. ,& 韦纳,H. (2023 年)。这只是一种观察。教育心理学评论》,35(83),在线发表:2023 年 8 月 14 日)感叹教育心理学正走向质量连续体的阴暗面,干预研究和随机对照试验越来越少,人们倾向于根据更多使用观察数据的臂力研究做出因果推论。本文讨论了即使有干预研究和随机对照试验,在进行因果推论时所面临的挑战。我们论证了基于观察数据的因果假设和建模对发现因果关系的有用性,同时也承认了它们的局限性。更重要的是,研究的严谨性既可以在实验或干预研究中实现,也可以在使用观察数据的研究中实现。偏袒也会限制我们的视角,扼杀创造力,减少学术多样性,从而玷污我们的领域。我们不应该让对相关证据的过度解读破坏整个观察研究领域。
{"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., &amp; 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}
引用次数: 0
Role of Gesturing Onscreen Instructors in Video Lectures: A Set of Three-level Meta-analyses on the Embodiment Effect 视频讲座中屏幕手势指导的作用:关于体现效果的一组三级元分析
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-06-28 DOI: 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 &amp; 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}
引用次数: 0
The Relation Between Perceived Mental Effort, Monitoring Judgments, and Learning Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis 感知心理努力、监测判断和学习结果之间的关系:元分析
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-06-26 DOI: 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.

在自我调节学习过程中,准确监控自己的学习过程取决于使用正确的线索,其中之一可能是感知到的脑力劳动。Baars 等人(2020 年)的一项荟萃分析发现,脑力劳动与监控判断之间存在负相关(r = -.35),这表明学习任务中的脑力劳动量通常与学习者的学习感知呈负相关。然而,目前还不清楚监控判断和脑力劳动感知与学习结果之间的关系。为了研究感知到的脑力劳动是否是学习结果的诊断线索,以及监控判断是否会调解这种关系,我们采用了元分析结构方程模型。结果表明,感知脑力劳动与监测判断之间存在中度负相关(β = -.19),监测判断与学习结果之间存在中度正相关(β = .29),感知脑力劳动与学习结果之间存在中度间接负相关(β = -.05),而监测判断在其中起中介作用。我们的分组分析没有发现不同调节因子之间的显著差异,这可能是由于每个调节因子类别所包含的研究数量有限。研究结果表明,当学习者感知到较高的脑力劳动水平时,他们会表现出较低的学习(信心)判断,这与较低的实际学习效果有关。因此,学习者似乎将感知到的脑力劳动作为判断其学习效果的线索,而感知到的脑力劳动只是间接地与实际学习效果相关。
{"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}
引用次数: 0
How Learners’ Visuospatial Ability and Different Ways of Changing the Perspective Influence Learning About Movements in Desktop and Immersive Virtual Reality Environments 学习者的视觉空间能力和改变视角的不同方式如何影响桌面和沉浸式虚拟现实环境中的移动学习
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-06-22 DOI: 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.

虚拟现实(VR)应用发展迅速,价格越来越实惠,为学习环境提供了各种优势。动态可视化通常适用于描述连续的过程(如不同的运动模式),特别是动态虚拟三维物体可以为运动提供不同的视角。本研究通过低沉浸式(桌面 "VR",研究 1)和高沉浸式虚拟环境(沉浸式 VR,研究 2)调查了不同交互形式从不同角度观察三维物体的效果。参与者可以控制三维物体的方向(研究 1,鼠标交互;研究 2,通过 VR 控制器进行手部交互),或者控制自己相对于三维物体的视角(研究 1,摄像头位置;研究 2,参与者自己身体的位置)。此外,研究还探讨了学习者视觉空间能力的调节作用。自变量包括图像识别(易、中、难)、事实知识、临场感和晕动病。结果显示,视觉空间能力较高的学习者的表现优于视觉空间能力较低的学习者。在研究 1 中,视觉空间能力较高的学习者通过控制摄像机的位置表现出了较高的识别能力(困难项目),而视觉空间能力较低的学习者则在这种互动形式中受到了影响。在研究 2 中,视觉空间能力较高的学习者通过控制三维模型取得了更好的识别成绩(简单项目),而视觉空间能力较低的学习者则倾向于在三维物体周围移动(中等项目)。身临其境的 VR 带来了更多的临场感和更强烈的晕动症。这项研究清楚地表明,在桌面虚拟现实中从多角度观看三维物体的不同交互形式并不能一对一地移植到沉浸式虚拟现实中。本文讨论了研究结果及其对虚拟学习环境设计的影响。
{"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}
引用次数: 0
Why Do Learners (Under)Utilize Interleaving in Learning Confusable Categories? The Role of Metastrategic Knowledge and Utility Value of Distinguishing 为什么学习者在学习易混淆类别时(未充分)利用交错法?元策略知识的作用和区分的实用价值
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-06-15 DOI: 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.

要区分容易混淆的类别,学习者就必须发现它们之间的预测性差异。交错序列--类别之间的切换--有助于学习者发现这些差异。然而,学习者更喜欢在一个类别内进行阻断--切换--来检测共性。在两个2 × 2因子实验中,我们研究了学习者在学习可混淆类别时很少进行交错的原因。在实验 1(N = 190)中,我们研究了能够区分可混淆的蘑菇双打对学习者自发选择学习顺序的效用价值的作用,以及条件知识成分的作用,即对于区分而言,(双打之间)差异的检测很重要。在实验 2(N = 134)中,我们再次调查了后者的作用,以及交错突出差异的条件知识部分的作用。结果表明,结合两个因素--提高区分的效用价值和告知学习者对于区分来说,发现差异很重要--促进了学习者对交错法的使用。总之,学习者比以前所认为的更能意识到交错能突出差异。尽管如此,学习者还是更倾向于分块学习,因为他们没有认识到区分的实用价值,也缺乏区分需要发现预测性差异的条件性知识。他们选择分块学习顺序反映了他们有意识地投入精力去寻找共同点,而不是一味地逃避努力。为了让学习者将精力分配从寻找共同点转移到寻找差异上,并让他们参与自发的交错学习,我们建议强调区分的效用价值,并告知学习者寻找差异对于区分的重要性。
{"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}
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