首页 > 最新文献

Educational Psychology Review最新文献

英文 中文
Using Decoding Measures to Identify Reading Difficulties: A Meta-analysis on English as a First Language Learners and English Language Learners 使用解码方法识别阅读困难:对英语作为第一语言学习者和英语学习者的元分析
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2025-01-30 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-025-09987-1
Miao Li, Shuai Zhang, Yuting Liu, Catherine Snow, Huan Zhang, Bing Han

Students with or at risk of reading difficulties (RD) benefit from accurate early identification and intervention. Previous research has employed various decoding measures to screen students for RD, but the criteria for identification have been inconsistent. Assessing students with RD is especially challenging in English Language Learners (ELLs), as vocabulary deficits can impact decoding. Additionally, few research syntheses have examined whether researchers use different measures to screen ELLs and EL1s for RD, and whether these differences result in distinct decoding profiles between ELLs with RD and EL1s with RD. To address these gaps, this study uses a meta-analysis to examine the decoding measures used in RD assessments and whether outcomes differ for ELLs and EL1s. The findings show that real word reading assessments identify students with more pronounced decoding deficits than nonword reading assessments. Despite the use of different RD screening measures for ELLs and EL1s, the gap between ELLs with and without RD was similar to that between EL1s with and without RD. These results suggest that real word-reliant measures, which are influenced by word knowledge, provide a more comprehensive assessment of RD than nonword-reliant measures for both ELLs and EL1s. We encourage future researchers to use consistent decoding measures when screening RD in both populations, to maximize comparability of findings.

有阅读困难或有阅读困难风险的学生受益于准确的早期识别和干预。先前的研究采用了各种解码措施来筛选学生的RD,但识别标准一直不一致。对英语学习者(ELLs)来说,评估有词汇障碍的学生尤其具有挑战性,因为词汇不足会影响解码。此外,很少有研究综合研究了研究人员是否使用不同的测量方法来筛选RD的ELLs和el1,以及这些差异是否导致RD的ELLs和RD的el1之间不同的解码谱。为了解决这些差距,本研究使用荟萃分析来检查RD评估中使用的解码方法,以及ELLs和el1的结果是否不同。研究结果表明,真实的单词阅读评估比非单词阅读评估更能识别出解码缺陷的学生。尽管在ELLs和el1中使用了不同的RD筛查方法,但有和没有RD的ELLs之间的差距与有和没有RD的el1之间的差距相似。这些结果表明,受单词知识影响的真正的单词依赖测量比非单词依赖测量对ELLs和el1都能提供更全面的RD评估。我们鼓励未来的研究人员在筛查两种人群的RD时使用一致的解码方法,以最大限度地提高结果的可比性。
{"title":"Using Decoding Measures to Identify Reading Difficulties: A Meta-analysis on English as a First Language Learners and English Language Learners","authors":"Miao Li, Shuai Zhang, Yuting Liu, Catherine Snow, Huan Zhang, Bing Han","doi":"10.1007/s10648-025-09987-1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-09987-1","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Students with or at risk of reading difficulties (RD) benefit from accurate early identification and intervention. Previous research has employed various decoding measures to screen students for RD, but the criteria for identification have been inconsistent. Assessing students with RD is especially challenging in English Language Learners (ELLs), as vocabulary deficits can impact decoding. Additionally, few research syntheses have examined whether researchers use different measures to screen ELLs and EL1s for RD, and whether these differences result in distinct decoding profiles between ELLs with RD and EL1s with RD. To address these gaps, this study uses a meta-analysis to examine the decoding measures used in RD assessments and whether outcomes differ for ELLs and EL1s. The findings show that real word reading assessments identify students with more pronounced decoding deficits than nonword reading assessments. Despite the use of different RD screening measures for ELLs and EL1s, the gap between ELLs with and without RD was similar to that between EL1s with and without RD. These results suggest that real word-reliant measures, which are influenced by word knowledge, provide a more comprehensive assessment of RD than nonword-reliant measures for both ELLs and EL1s. We encourage future researchers to use consistent decoding measures when screening RD in both populations, to maximize comparability of findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143056626","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
Interventions to Teacher Well-Being and Burnout A Scoping Review 教师幸福感和职业倦怠的干预:范围评估
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2025-01-28 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-025-09986-2
Pauliina Avola, Tiina Soini-Ikonen, Anne Jyrkiäinen, Viivi Pentikäinen

Teacher burnout, stress, and turnover are increasing globally, underscoring the need to explore ways to reduce burnout and support teacher well-being. This scoping review identifies the contents, characteristics, and results of interventions to increase teacher well-being and reduce burnout. The search was conducted using two databases (Education Research Complete and ERIC). Out of 958 studies, 46 addressed interventions to support teacher well-being or reduce teacher burnout. The data covered 7369 participants in 15 countries. Of the 46 studies, 14 used mixed methods, four qualitative approaches, and 28 used quantitative approaches. The content of the interventions primarily focused on improving individual well-being, with some interventions incorporating communal activities. The qualitative content analysis revealed a broad spectrum of intervention activities, including physical activity, mindfulness and meditation, professional development, therapy-based techniques, gratitude practices, and a mix of multiple activities. The PERMA-H model of positive psychology is applied to unify the heterogeneous field of teacher well-being intervention research. The PERMA-H model's contents were broadly consistent with the intervention's contents, emphasising engagement (E), positive emotions (P), relationships (R), and health (H). The gratitude interventions, therapy-based interventions, physical activity interventions, and most mindfulness and meditation interventions, professional development and mixed activities interventions positively contributed to teacher well-being. Overall, the review highlights the diverse methods and theoretical frameworks employed to address teacher well-being, which the PERMA-H model can unify.

在全球范围内,教师的职业倦怠、压力和离职都在增加,这凸显了探索减少职业倦怠和支持教师福祉的方法的必要性。这个范围审查确定的内容,特点,和干预的结果,以增加教师福祉和减少倦怠。搜索使用两个数据库(教育研究完成和ERIC)进行。在958项研究中,46项涉及支持教师福祉或减少教师倦怠的干预措施。数据涵盖了15个国家的7369名参与者。在46项研究中,14项采用混合方法,4项采用定性方法,28项采用定量方法。干预措施的内容主要侧重于改善个人福祉,有些干预措施还包括社区活动。定性内容分析揭示了广泛的干预活动,包括身体活动,正念和冥想,专业发展,基于治疗的技术,感恩实践,以及多种活动的组合。运用积极心理学的PERMA-H模型统一了教师幸福感干预研究的异质领域。PERMA-H模型的内容与干预的内容大致一致,强调敬业(E)、积极情绪(P)、关系(R)和健康(H)。感恩干预、基于治疗的干预、身体活动干预、大多数正念和冥想干预、专业发展和混合活动干预对教师幸福感有积极的贡献。总体而言,该综述强调了用于解决教师福利问题的各种方法和理论框架,PERMA-H模型可以将其统一起来。
{"title":"Interventions to Teacher Well-Being and Burnout A Scoping Review","authors":"Pauliina Avola, Tiina Soini-Ikonen, Anne Jyrkiäinen, Viivi Pentikäinen","doi":"10.1007/s10648-025-09986-2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-09986-2","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Teacher burnout, stress, and turnover are increasing globally, underscoring the need to explore ways to reduce burnout and support teacher well-being. This scoping review identifies the contents, characteristics, and results of interventions to increase teacher well-being and reduce burnout. The search was conducted using two databases (Education Research Complete and ERIC). Out of 958 studies, 46 addressed interventions to support teacher well-being or reduce teacher burnout. The data covered 7369 participants in 15 countries. Of the 46 studies, 14 used mixed methods, four qualitative approaches, and 28 used quantitative approaches. The content of the interventions primarily focused on improving individual well-being, with some interventions incorporating communal activities. The qualitative content analysis revealed a broad spectrum of intervention activities, including physical activity, mindfulness and meditation, professional development, therapy-based techniques, gratitude practices, and a mix of multiple activities. The PERMA-H model of positive psychology is applied to unify the heterogeneous field of teacher well-being intervention research. The PERMA-H model's contents were broadly consistent with the intervention's contents, emphasising engagement (E), positive emotions (P), relationships (R), and health (H). The gratitude interventions, therapy-based interventions, physical activity interventions, and most mindfulness and meditation interventions, professional development and mixed activities interventions positively contributed to teacher well-being. Overall, the review highlights the diverse methods and theoretical frameworks employed to address teacher well-being, which the PERMA-H model can unify.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2025-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143049976","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
Examining the Effects of Family-Implemented Literacy Interventions for School-Aged Children: A Meta-Analysis 检视家庭实施的学龄儿童识字干预的效果:一项元分析
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2025-01-25 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-025-09985-3
Katlynn Dahl-Leonard, Colby Hall, Eunsoo Cho, Philip Capin, Garrett J. Roberts, Karen F. Kehoe, Christa Haring, Delanie Peacott, Alisha Demchak

There is considerable research evaluating the effects of family members implementing shared book reading interventions, especially during early childhood. However, less is known about the effects of family members providing instruction to help their school-aged children develop literacy skills, including both code-focused and meaning-focused skills that facilitate reading comprehension. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to describe and evaluate recent research examining the effects of at-home, family-implemented literacy interventions for school-aged children. A total of 25 interventions across 22 studies (12 with group designs and 10 with single-case experimental designs) were analyzed. The average effect on combined literacy outcomes was estimated as g = 0.36 (p < .01; Q = 191.83; I2 = 36.17) for group design studies and g = 1.50 (p < .01; Q = 114.58; I2 = 38.58) for single-case experimental design studies. Notably, for group design studies, effects varied by literacy outcome type. The mean effect for code-focused outcomes (i.e., PA, decoding/word reading, spelling, text reading) was g = 0.28 (p < .01) and the mean effect for meaning-focused outcomes (i.e., vocabulary, listening comprehension, reading comprehension) was g = 0.41 (p < .01). Overall, these findings support the implementation of family-delivered literacy interventions to improve literacy outcomes for school-aged children. At the same time, this meta-analysis revealed the paucity of research examining the effects of family-implemented literacy interventions, especially for older children, indicating a need for more research on this topic.

有相当多的研究评估了家庭成员实施共同读书干预的效果,特别是在儿童早期。然而,对于家庭成员提供指导以帮助学龄儿童发展识字技能的影响,包括促进阅读理解的以代码为中心和以意义为中心的技能,人们所知甚少。本荟萃分析的目的是描述和评估最近的研究,研究家庭实施的识字干预对学龄儿童的影响。共分析了22项研究中的25项干预措施(12项采用组设计,10项采用单例实验设计)。对综合识字结果的平均影响估计为g = 0.36 (p < 0.01;q = 191.83;组设计研究I2 = 36.17), g = 1.50 (p < .01;q = 114.58;I2 = 38.58)为单例实验设计研究。值得注意的是,在群体设计研究中,效果因读写能力结果类型而异。以编码为中心的结果(即PA、解码/单词阅读、拼写、文本阅读)的平均效应为g = 0.28 (p < 0.01),以意义为中心的结果(即词汇、听力理解、阅读理解)的平均效应为g = 0.41 (p < 0.01)。总体而言,这些发现支持实施家庭提供的扫盲干预措施,以改善学龄儿童的扫盲结果。与此同时,本荟萃分析显示,对家庭实施的扫盲干预措施的影响进行研究的缺乏,特别是对年龄较大的儿童,这表明需要对这一主题进行更多的研究。
{"title":"Examining the Effects of Family-Implemented Literacy Interventions for School-Aged Children: A Meta-Analysis","authors":"Katlynn Dahl-Leonard, Colby Hall, Eunsoo Cho, Philip Capin, Garrett J. Roberts, Karen F. Kehoe, Christa Haring, Delanie Peacott, Alisha Demchak","doi":"10.1007/s10648-025-09985-3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-09985-3","url":null,"abstract":"<p>There is considerable research evaluating the effects of family members implementing shared book reading interventions, especially during early childhood. However, less is known about the effects of family members providing instruction to help their school-aged children develop literacy skills, including both code-focused and meaning-focused skills that facilitate reading comprehension. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to describe and evaluate recent research examining the effects of at-home, family-implemented literacy interventions for school-aged children. A total of 25 interventions across 22 studies (12 with group designs and 10 with single-case experimental designs) were analyzed. The average effect on combined literacy outcomes was estimated as <i>g</i> = 0.36 (<i>p</i> &lt; .01; <i>Q</i> = 191.83; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 36.17) for group design studies and <i>g</i> = 1.50 (<i>p</i> &lt; .01; <i>Q</i> = 114.58; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 38.58) for single-case experimental design studies. Notably, for group design studies, effects varied by literacy outcome type. The mean effect for code-focused outcomes (i.e., PA, decoding/word reading, spelling, text reading) was <i>g</i> = 0.28 (<i>p</i> &lt; .01) and the mean effect for meaning-focused outcomes (i.e., vocabulary, listening comprehension, reading comprehension) was <i>g</i> = 0.41 (<i>p</i> &lt; .01). Overall, these findings support the implementation of family-delivered literacy interventions to improve literacy outcomes for school-aged children. At the same time, this meta-analysis revealed the paucity of research examining the effects of family-implemented literacy interventions, especially for older children, indicating a need for more research on this topic.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2025-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143031040","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 Virtual Reality in Your Head: How Immersion and Mental Imagery Are Connected to Knowledge Retention 你头脑中的虚拟现实:沉浸和心理意象如何与知识保留联系在一起
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2025-01-24 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-025-09984-4
Alex Barrett, Nuodi Zhang, Shiyao Wei

Immersive learning is predominantly constrained to technology-based interventions but has the potential for more diverse applications. This study reports on an experiment investigating the learning affordances of psychological immersion evoked by narrative absorption. A total of 228 participants were randomly assigned to one of three forms of media, an image, a word list, and a narrative, all of which contained identical items to be memorized for immediate and delayed free recall memory tests. Other variables measured were immersion, extraneous cognitive load, and mental imagery. ANOVA and correlation analyses showed that the narrative media was found to be significantly more immersive and that it evoked mental imagery in individuals at higher levels than both the list and image media. Importantly, there was more decay in memory recall between immediate and delayed tests for those exposed to the list and the image than for those who read the narrative. This implies the utility of immersive narratives for spontaneous mental image generation, which leads to improved knowledge retention. Other implications for immersive learning theory are discussed, and practical solutions for incorporating narrative immersion in learning are also suggested.

沉浸式学习主要局限于基于技术的干预,但具有更多样化应用的潜力。本研究报告了一项研究叙事吸收诱发的心理沉浸学习启示的实验。共有228名参与者被随机分配到三种媒体形式中的一种,一种是图像,一种是单词列表,一种是叙述,所有这些都包含相同的项目,需要在即时和延迟自由回忆记忆测试中记忆。测量的其他变量包括沉浸感、外来认知负荷和心理意象。方差分析和相关分析表明,叙事媒体比列表媒体和图像媒体更具有沉浸感,在更高层次上激发了个体的心理意象。重要的是,在即时测试和延迟测试中,那些接触列表和图像的人比那些阅读叙述的人记忆力衰退得更多。这意味着沉浸式叙述对自发的心理图像生成的效用,从而提高知识保留。本文还讨论了沉浸式学习理论的其他含义,并提出了将叙事沉浸式学习纳入学习的实际解决方案。
{"title":"The Virtual Reality in Your Head: How Immersion and Mental Imagery Are Connected to Knowledge Retention","authors":"Alex Barrett, Nuodi Zhang, Shiyao Wei","doi":"10.1007/s10648-025-09984-4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-09984-4","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Immersive learning is predominantly constrained to technology-based interventions but has the potential for more diverse applications. This study reports on an experiment investigating the learning affordances of psychological immersion evoked by narrative absorption. A total of 228 participants were randomly assigned to one of three forms of media, an image, a word list, and a narrative, all of which contained identical items to be memorized for immediate and delayed free recall memory tests. Other variables measured were immersion, extraneous cognitive load, and mental imagery. ANOVA and correlation analyses showed that the narrative media was found to be significantly more immersive and that it evoked mental imagery in individuals at higher levels than both the list and image media. Importantly, there was more decay in memory recall between immediate and delayed tests for those exposed to the list and the image than for those who read the narrative. This implies the utility of immersive narratives for spontaneous mental image generation, which leads to improved knowledge retention. Other implications for immersive learning theory are discussed, and practical solutions for incorporating narrative immersion in learning are also suggested.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"119 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2025-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143026755","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
Advancing Self-Reports of Self-Regulated Learning: Validating New Measures to Assess Students’ Beliefs, Practices, and Challenges 推进自我调节学习的自我报告:验证评估学生信念、实践和挑战的新措施
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2025-01-22 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09977-9
Allyson F. Hadwin, Ramin Rostampour, Philip H. Winne

Self-report measures are essential sources of information about learners’ studying perceptions. These perceptions also guide self-regulated learning (SRL) decisions and strategies in future studying. However, the development of self-report methods has not kept pace with other multi-modal methodological advancements, particularly in the field of self-regulated learning. The purpose of this study was to test the psychometric adequacy and predictive utility of four complementary SRL-grounded measures examining students’ perceptions of SRL during studying. Participants were two samples (N = 220; N = 473) of post-secondary students enrolled in various academic disciplines. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses confirmed the measurement adequacy of (a) a 4-factor SRL self-efficacy measure, (b) a 4-factor SRL importance measure, (c) a 6-factor self-regulated learning practices measure, and (d) a 6-factor academic challenges measure. The predictive validity of factors within each measure revealed that (a) prioritizing and feeling confident about planning and foundational academic behaviors positively predicted academic performance, and (b) SRL practices were either positively associated with academic performance or negatively associated with academic challenges. Despite being underrepresented in most measures of SRL, task understanding practices were found to be important for predicting academic performance beyond other SRL practices. Overall, findings indicate that student’s self-reports about SRL beliefs and practices can predict academic outcomes.

自我报告测量是了解学习者学习感知的重要信息来源。这些感知也指导着自我调节学习(SRL)在未来学习中的决策和策略。然而,自我报告方法的发展并没有跟上其他多模式方法的进步,尤其是在自我调节学习领域。本研究旨在测试四种以自律学习为基础的互补性测量方法的心理测量充分性和预测效用,以检验学生在学习过程中对自律学习的看法。研究对象是两个样本(N = 220;N = 473),分别是就读于不同学科的大专学生。探索性和确认性因素分析证实了(a)4因素自律学习自我效能感测量、(b)4因素自律学习重要性测量、(c)6因素自律学习实践测量和(d)6因素学业挑战测量的测量充分性。每项测量中各因素的预测有效性显示:(a) 规划和基础学习行为的优先次序和自信对学业成绩有积极的预测作用;(b) 自律学习实践与学业成绩呈正相关或与学业挑战呈负相关。尽管在大多数自学能力的测量中,任务理解实践所占比例较低,但研究发现,任务理解实践在预测学业成绩方面的重要性超过了其他自学能力实践。总之,研究结果表明,学生对自学能力信念和实践的自我报告可以预测学习成绩。
{"title":"Advancing Self-Reports of Self-Regulated Learning: Validating New Measures to Assess Students’ Beliefs, Practices, and Challenges","authors":"Allyson F. Hadwin, Ramin Rostampour, Philip H. Winne","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09977-9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09977-9","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Self-report measures are essential sources of information about learners’ studying perceptions. These perceptions also guide self-regulated learning (SRL) decisions and strategies in future studying. However, the development of self-report methods has not kept pace with other multi-modal methodological advancements, particularly in the field of self-regulated learning. The purpose of this study was to test the psychometric adequacy and predictive utility of four complementary SRL-grounded measures examining students’ perceptions of SRL during studying. Participants were two samples (<i>N</i> = 220; <i>N</i> = 473) of post-secondary students enrolled in various academic disciplines. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses confirmed the measurement adequacy of (a) a 4-factor SRL self-efficacy measure, (b) a 4-factor SRL importance measure, (c) a 6-factor self-regulated learning practices measure, and (d) a 6-factor academic challenges measure. The predictive validity of factors within each measure revealed that (a) prioritizing and feeling confident about planning and foundational academic behaviors positively predicted academic performance, and (b) SRL practices were either positively associated with academic performance or negatively associated with academic challenges. Despite being underrepresented in most measures of SRL, task understanding practices were found to be important for predicting academic performance beyond other SRL practices. Overall, findings indicate that student’s self-reports about SRL beliefs and practices can predict academic outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"45 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2025-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142992239","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
Far Transfer of Metacognitive Regulation: From Cognitive Learning Strategy Use to Mental Effort Regulation 元认知调节的远迁移:从认知学习策略使用到心理努力调节
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2025-01-18 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09983-x
Joachim Wirth, Xenia-Lea Weber-Reuter, Corinna Schuster, Jens Fleischer, Detlev Leutner, Ferdinand Stebner

Training of self-regulated learning is most effective if it supports learning strategies in combination with metacognitive regulation, and learners can transfer their acquired metacognitive regulation skills to different tasks that require the use of the same learning strategy (near transfer). However, whether learners can transfer metacognitive regulation skills acquired in combination with a specific learning strategy to the regulation of a different learning strategy (far transfer) is still under debate. While there is empirical evidence that learners can transfer metacognitive regulation between different learning strategies of the same type (e.g., from one cognitive learning strategy to another), whether transfer also occurs between learning strategies of different types is an open question. Here, we conducted an experimental field study with 5th and 6th grade students (N = 777). Students were cluster-randomized and assigned to one of three groups: two experimental groups receiving different training on the metacognitive regulation of a cognitive learning strategy and one control group receiving no training. After training, students worked on two different tasks; after each task, we measured their metacognitive regulation of a resource management strategy, that is, investing mental effort. Results (based on data from 368 students due to pandemic conditions) indicated far metacognitive regulation transfer: After training, students in the training groups were better able to metacognitively regulate their mental effort than students in the control group. Although effect sizes were small, our results support the hypothesis of far transfer of metacognitive regulation.

如果支持学习策略与元认知调节相结合,自我调节学习的训练是最有效的,学习者可以将他们获得的元认知调节技能转移到需要使用相同学习策略的不同任务中(近迁移)。然而,学习者是否可以将与特定学习策略相结合获得的元认知调节技能转移到不同学习策略的调节(远迁移)中,仍然存在争议。虽然有经验证据表明学习者可以在同一类型的不同学习策略之间迁移元认知调节(例如,从一种认知学习策略到另一种认知学习策略),但不同类型的学习策略之间是否也会发生迁移是一个悬而未决的问题。在这里,我们对五年级和六年级的学生(N = 777)进行了实地实验研究。学生被随机分成三组:两个实验组接受不同的认知学习策略元认知调节训练,另一个对照组不接受任何训练。训练结束后,学生们要完成两项不同的任务;在每个任务之后,我们测量了他们对资源管理策略的元认知调节,即投入精神努力。结果(基于来自368名学生的数据,由于流行病条件)表明远元认知调节转移:训练后,训练组的学生比对照组的学生更能元认知调节他们的心理努力。虽然效应量很小,但我们的结果支持元认知调节远转移的假设。
{"title":"Far Transfer of Metacognitive Regulation: From Cognitive Learning Strategy Use to Mental Effort Regulation","authors":"Joachim Wirth, Xenia-Lea Weber-Reuter, Corinna Schuster, Jens Fleischer, Detlev Leutner, Ferdinand Stebner","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09983-x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09983-x","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Training of self-regulated learning is most effective if it supports learning strategies in combination with metacognitive regulation, and learners can transfer their acquired metacognitive regulation skills to different tasks that require the use of the same learning strategy (near transfer). However, whether learners can transfer metacognitive regulation skills acquired in combination with a specific learning strategy to the regulation of a different learning strategy (far transfer) is still under debate. While there is empirical evidence that learners can transfer metacognitive regulation between different learning strategies of the same type (e.g., from one cognitive learning strategy to another), whether transfer also occurs between learning strategies of different types is an open question. Here, we conducted an experimental field study with 5th and 6th grade students (<i>N</i> = 777). Students were cluster-randomized and assigned to one of three groups: two experimental groups receiving different training on the metacognitive regulation of a cognitive learning strategy and one control group receiving no training. After training, students worked on two different tasks; after each task, we measured their metacognitive regulation of a resource management strategy, that is, investing mental effort. Results (based on data from 368 students due to pandemic conditions) indicated far metacognitive regulation transfer: After training, students in the training groups were better able to metacognitively regulate their mental effort than students in the control group. Although effect sizes were small, our results support the hypothesis of far transfer of metacognitive regulation.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2025-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142988475","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
An Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis to Support Power Analyses for Randomized Intervention Studies in Preschool: Cognitive and Socio-Emotional Learning Outcomes 个体参与者数据荟萃分析支持学龄前随机干预研究的有效性分析:认知和社会情绪学习结果
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2025-01-14 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09981-z
Martin Brunner, Sophie E. Stallasch, Cordula Artelt, Oliver Lüdtke

There is a need for robust evidence about which educational interventions work in preschool to foster children’s cognitive and socio-emotional learning (SEL) outcomes. Lab-based individually randomized experiments can develop and refine such interventions, and field-based randomized experiments (e.g., cluster randomized trials) evaluate their effectiveness in real-world daycare center settings. Applying reliable estimates of design parameters in the context of a priori power analyses is essential to ensure that the sample size of these studies is adequate to support strong statistical conclusions regarding the strength of the intervention effect. However, there is little knowledge on relevant design parameters with preschool children. We therefore utilized a systematic collection of individual participant data from four German probability samples (554 ≤ N ≤ 2928) with preschool children (aged two to six years) to estimate and meta-analyze design parameters. These parameters are relevant for planning single-level (e.g., in non-clustered lab-based settings), two-level (children nested in daycare centers), and three-level (children nested in groups, with groups nested in daycare centers) randomized intervention studies targeting cognitive and SEL outcomes assessed with three methods (standardized tests, parent ratings, and educator ratings). The design parameters depict between-group and -center differences as well as the proportion of variance in the outcomes explained by different covariate sets (socio-demographic characteristics, baseline measures, and their combination) at the child, group, and center level. In conclusion, this paper provides a rich source of design parameters, recommendations, and illustrations to support a priori power analyses for randomized intervention studies in early childhood education research.

我们需要强有力的证据来证明哪些教育干预措施在学前教育中能够促进儿童的认知和社会情感学习(SEL)成果。基于实验室的个别随机实验可以开发和完善此类干预措施,而基于现场的随机实验(如群组随机试验)则可以评估这些干预措施在实际日托中心环境中的有效性。在先验功率分析中应用可靠的设计参数估计,对于确保这些研究的样本量足以支持有关干预效果强度的有力统计结论至关重要。然而,我们对学龄前儿童的相关设计参数知之甚少。因此,我们利用从四个德国学龄前儿童(2-6 岁)概率样本(554 ≤ N ≤ 2928)中系统收集的个体参与者数据,对设计参数进行了估计和元分析。这些参数适用于规划单层次(例如,在非聚类实验室环境中)、双层次(儿童嵌套在日托中心)和三层次(儿童嵌套在小组中,小组嵌套在日托中心)随机干预研究,这些研究的目标是用三种方法(标准化测试、家长评分和教育者评分)评估认知和 SEL 结果。设计参数描述了组间和中心间的差异,以及不同协变量集(社会人口特征、基线测量及其组合)在儿童、小组和中心层面所解释的结果差异比例。总之,本文提供了丰富的设计参数、建议和图示,为幼儿教育研究中的随机干预研究的先验功率分析提供了支持。
{"title":"An Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis to Support Power Analyses for Randomized Intervention Studies in Preschool: Cognitive and Socio-Emotional Learning Outcomes","authors":"Martin Brunner, Sophie E. Stallasch, Cordula Artelt, Oliver Lüdtke","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09981-z","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09981-z","url":null,"abstract":"<p>There is a need for robust evidence about which educational interventions work in preschool to foster children’s cognitive and socio-emotional learning (SEL) outcomes. Lab-based individually randomized experiments can develop and refine such interventions, and field-based randomized experiments (e.g., cluster randomized trials) evaluate their effectiveness in real-world daycare center settings. Applying reliable estimates of design parameters in the context of a priori power analyses is essential to ensure that the sample size of these studies is adequate to support strong statistical conclusions regarding the strength of the intervention effect. However, there is little knowledge on relevant design parameters with preschool children. We therefore utilized a systematic collection of individual participant data from four German probability samples (554 ≤ <i>N</i> ≤ 2928) with preschool children (aged two to six years) to estimate and meta-analyze design parameters. These parameters are relevant for planning single-level (e.g., in non-clustered lab-based settings), two-level (children nested in daycare centers), and three-level (children nested in groups, with groups nested in daycare centers) randomized intervention studies targeting cognitive and SEL outcomes assessed with three methods (standardized tests, parent ratings, and educator ratings). The design parameters depict between-group and -center differences as well as the proportion of variance in the outcomes explained by different covariate sets (socio-demographic characteristics, baseline measures, and their combination) at the child, group, and center level. In conclusion, this paper provides a rich source of design parameters, recommendations, and illustrations to support a priori power analyses for randomized intervention studies in early childhood education research.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"82 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2025-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142974836","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
Developing the Mental Effort and Load–Translingual Scale (MEL-TS) as a Foundation for Translingual Research in Self-Regulated Learning 开发心智努力和负荷-译语量表(MEL-TS):为自我调节学习的译语研究奠定基础
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2025-01-10 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09978-8
Tino Endres, Lisa Bender, Stoo Sepp, Shirong Zhang, Louise David, Melanie Trypke, Dwayne Lieck, Juliette C. Désiron, Johanna Bohm, Sophia Weissgerber, Juan Cristobal Castro-Alonso, Fred Paas

Assessing cognitive demand is crucial for research on self-regulated learning; however, discrepancies in translating essential concepts across languages can hinder the comparison of research findings. Different languages often emphasize various components and interpret certain constructs differently. This paper aims to develop a translingual set of items distinguishing between intentionally invested mental effort and passively perceived mental load as key differentiations of cognitive demand in a broad range of learning situations, as they occur in self-regulated learning. Using a mixed-methods approach, we evaluated the content, criterion, convergent, and incremental validity of this scale in different languages. To establish content validity, we conducted qualitative interviews with bilingual participants who discussed their understanding of mental effort and load. These participants translated and back-translated established and new items from the cognitive-demand literature into English, Dutch, Spanish, German, Chinese, and French. To establish criterion validity, we conducted preregistered experiments using the English, Chinese, and German versions of the scale. Within those experiments, we validated the translated items using established demand manipulations from the cognitive load literature with first-language participants. In a within-subjects design with eight measurements (N = 131), we demonstrated the scale’s criterion validity by showing sensitivity to differences in task complexity, extraneous load manipulation, and motivation for complex tasks. We found evidence for convergent and incremental validity shown by medium-size correlations with established cognitive load measures. We offer a set of translated and validated items as a common foundation for translingual research. As best practice, we recommend four items within a reference point evaluation.

认知需求评估是自主学习研究的重要内容;然而,基本概念跨语言翻译的差异会阻碍研究结果的比较。不同的语言往往强调不同的组成部分,并以不同的方式解释某些结构。本文旨在开发一套可区分有意投入的心理努力和被动感知的心理负荷的项目,作为广泛的学习情境中认知需求的关键区分,因为它们发生在自我调节学习中。使用混合方法,我们评估了该量表在不同语言中的内容、标准、收敛和增量有效性。为了建立内容效度,我们对双语参与者进行了定性访谈,讨论了他们对心理努力和负荷的理解。这些参与者将认知需求文献中已有的和新的条目翻译成英语、荷兰语、西班牙语、德语、汉语和法语。为了建立标准效度,我们使用英文、中文和德文版本的量表进行了预注册实验。在这些实验中,我们使用认知负荷文献中建立的需求操作来验证翻译后的项目。在包含8个测量值(N = 131)的受试者内设计中,我们通过显示对任务复杂性、外部负载操作和复杂任务动机差异的敏感性来证明量表的标准效度。我们发现了收敛效度和增量效度的证据,表明中等大小的相关性与已建立的认知负荷测量。我们提供一套经过翻译和验证的项目,作为翻译研究的共同基础。作为最佳实践,我们在参考点评估中推荐四个项目。
{"title":"Developing the Mental Effort and Load–Translingual Scale (MEL-TS) as a Foundation for Translingual Research in Self-Regulated Learning","authors":"Tino Endres, Lisa Bender, Stoo Sepp, Shirong Zhang, Louise David, Melanie Trypke, Dwayne Lieck, Juliette C. Désiron, Johanna Bohm, Sophia Weissgerber, Juan Cristobal Castro-Alonso, Fred Paas","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09978-8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09978-8","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Assessing cognitive demand is crucial for research on self-regulated learning; however, discrepancies in translating essential concepts across languages can hinder the comparison of research findings. Different languages often emphasize various components and interpret certain constructs differently. This paper aims to develop a translingual set of items distinguishing between intentionally invested mental effort and passively perceived mental load as key differentiations of cognitive demand in a broad range of learning situations, as they occur in self-regulated learning. Using a mixed-methods approach, we evaluated the content, criterion, convergent, and incremental validity of this scale in different languages. To establish content validity, we conducted qualitative interviews with bilingual participants who discussed their understanding of mental effort and load. These participants translated and back-translated established and new items from the cognitive-demand literature into English, Dutch, Spanish, German, Chinese, and French. To establish criterion validity, we conducted preregistered experiments using the English, Chinese, and German versions of the scale. Within those experiments, we validated the translated items using established demand manipulations from the cognitive load literature with first-language participants. In a within-subjects design with eight measurements (<i>N</i> = 131), we demonstrated the scale’s criterion validity by showing sensitivity to differences in task complexity, extraneous load manipulation, and motivation for complex tasks. We found evidence for convergent and incremental validity shown by medium-size correlations with established cognitive load measures. We offer a set of translated and validated items as a common foundation for translingual research. As best practice, we recommend four items within a reference point evaluation.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"33 9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2025-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142939943","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 Cronbach’s Alpha of Domain-Specific Knowledge Tests Before and After Learning: A Meta-Analysis of Published Studies 学习前后特定领域知识测试的Cronbach’s Alpha:对已发表研究的元分析
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2025-01-09 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09982-y
Peter A. Edelsbrunner, Bianca A. Simonsmeier, Michael Schneider

Knowledge is an important predictor and outcome of learning and development. Its measurement is challenged by the fact that knowledge can be integrated and homogeneous, or fragmented and heterogeneous, which can change through learning. These characteristics of knowledge are at odds with current standards for test development, demanding a high internal consistency (e.g., Cronbach's Alphas greater .70). To provide an initial empirical base for this debate, we conducted a meta-analysis of the Cronbach's Alphas of knowledge tests derived from an available data set. Based on 285 effect sizes from 55 samples, the estimated typical Alpha of domain-specific knowledge tests in publications was α = .85, CI90 [.82; .87]. Alpha was so high despite a low mean item intercorrelation of .22 because the tests were relatively long on average and bias in the test construction or publication process led to an underrepresentation of low Alphas. Alpha was higher in tests with more items, with open answers and in younger age, it increased after interventions and throughout development, and it was higher for knowledge in languages and mathematics than in science and social sciences/humanities. Generally, Alphas varied strongly between different knowledge tests and populations with different characteristics, reflected in a 90% prediction interval of [.35, .96]. We suggest this range as a guideline for the Alphas that researchers can expect for knowledge tests with 20 items, providing guidelines for shorter and longer tests. We discuss implications for our understanding of domain-specific knowledge and how fixed cut-off values for the internal consistency of knowledge tests bias research findings.

知识是学习和发展的重要预测因素和结果。它的测量受到以下事实的挑战:知识可以是整合的、同质的,也可以是碎片化的、异质的,这可以通过学习来改变。知识的这些特征与当前测试开发的标准不一致,需要高度的内部一致性(例如,Cronbach’s alpha大于0.70)。为了给这个争论提供一个初步的经验基础,我们从一个可用的数据集中对克朗巴赫的知识alpha测试进行了meta分析。基于55个样本的285个效应量,估计出版物中特定领域知识测试的典型Alpha为α =。85, 90 [.82];.87点)。尽管平均项目的相互关系很低,只有0.22,但Alpha仍然很高,因为测试的平均时间相对较长,测试结构或发表过程中的偏差导致低Alpha的代表性不足。Alpha在项目较多、答案开放的测试中较高,在年龄较小的测试中,干预后和整个发展过程中Alpha都有所增加,语言和数学知识的Alpha高于科学和社会科学/人文科学。一般来说,alpha值在不同的知识测试和不同特征的人群之间差异很大,反映在90%的预测区间为[。35岁,.96点)。我们建议这个范围作为alpha的指导方针,研究人员可以期望有20个项目的知识测试,为较短和较长的测试提供指导方针。我们讨论了我们对特定领域知识的理解的含义,以及知识测试内部一致性的固定截止值如何影响研究结果。
{"title":"The Cronbach’s Alpha of Domain-Specific Knowledge Tests Before and After Learning: A Meta-Analysis of Published Studies","authors":"Peter A. Edelsbrunner, Bianca A. Simonsmeier, Michael Schneider","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09982-y","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09982-y","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Knowledge is an important predictor and outcome of learning and development. Its measurement is challenged by the fact that knowledge can be integrated and homogeneous, or fragmented and heterogeneous, which can change through learning. These characteristics of knowledge are at odds with current standards for test development, demanding a high internal consistency (e.g., Cronbach's Alphas greater .70). To provide an initial empirical base for this debate, we conducted a meta-analysis of the Cronbach's Alphas of knowledge tests derived from an available data set. Based on 285 effect sizes from 55 samples, the estimated typical Alpha of domain-specific knowledge tests in publications was α = .85, CI90 [.82; .87]. Alpha was so high despite a low mean item intercorrelation of .22 because the tests were relatively long on average and bias in the test construction or publication process led to an underrepresentation of low Alphas. Alpha was higher in tests with more items, with open answers and in younger age, it increased after interventions and throughout development, and it was higher for knowledge in languages and mathematics than in science and social sciences/humanities. Generally, Alphas varied strongly between different knowledge tests and populations with different characteristics, reflected in a 90% prediction interval of [.35, .96]. We suggest this range as a guideline for the Alphas that researchers can expect for knowledge tests with 20 items, providing guidelines for shorter and longer tests. We discuss implications for our understanding of domain-specific knowledge and how fixed cut-off values for the internal consistency of knowledge tests bias research findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2025-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142936942","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 Psychological Interventions on Statistics Anxiety, Statistics Self-Efficacy, and Attitudes Toward Statistics in University Students: A Systematic Review 心理干预对大学生统计焦虑、统计自我效能感和统计态度的影响:系统回顾
IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Pub Date : 2025-01-06 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-024-09979-7
Renata A. Mendes, Natalie J. Loxton, Nicholas G. Browning, Rebecca K. Lawrence

Psychological interventions offer a unique approach to enhancing the educational experience for university students. Unlike traditional teaching methods, these interventions directly address cognitive, emotional, and behavioural factors without requiring changes to course content, delivery methods, or involvement from the teaching team. This systematic review evaluated psychological interventions that were designed to reduce statistics anxiety, boost statistics self-efficacy, and/or foster positive attitudes toward statistics among university students enrolled in statistics courses. All included studies followed a longitudinal design with at least pre- and post-intervention assessments, comprising single group studies, randomised controlled trials, and non-randomised control studies. The protocol of this systematic review was registered with PROSPERO. Search terms were entered into five databases. The screening, assessment of risk of bias, and data extraction processes were conducted by two independent reviewers. Meta-analysis was not conducted due to the heterogeneity across the included studies. Therefore, a narrative synthesis was used to describe the results of 11 studies (1786 participants), encompassing studies targeting statistics anxiety, attitudes, self-efficacy, or a combination of these outcomes. Findings revealed that although no intervention was definitively effective in reducing statistics anxiety, some showed promise, especially those combining exposure with coping strategies. Moreover, the review identified interventions that effectively improved self-efficacy and attitudes, discussed some important methodological considerations, and provided suggestions for future psychological interventions. Finally, further empirical research is necessary to address existing limitations and fully understand the effectiveness of these interventions, particularly regarding statistics anxiety.

心理干预为提高大学生的教育体验提供了一种独特的方法。与传统的教学方法不同,这些干预措施直接针对认知、情感和行为因素,而不需要改变课程内容、教学方法或教学团队的参与。本系统综述评估了心理干预措施,旨在减少统计焦虑,提高统计自我效能,和/或培养统计课程的大学生对统计的积极态度。所有纳入的研究都遵循纵向设计,至少进行干预前和干预后评估,包括单组研究、随机对照试验和非随机对照研究。该系统评价的方案已在PROSPERO注册。搜索词被输入到五个数据库中。筛选、偏倚风险评估和数据提取过程由两名独立审稿人进行。由于纳入研究的异质性,未进行meta分析。因此,采用叙事综合方法来描述11项研究(1786名参与者)的结果,包括针对统计焦虑、态度、自我效能或这些结果组合的研究。研究结果显示,虽然没有干预措施在减少统计焦虑方面绝对有效,但有些干预措施显示出了希望,特别是那些将暴露与应对策略相结合的干预措施。此外,本文还确定了有效改善自我效能感和态度的干预措施,讨论了一些重要的方法考虑,并为未来的心理干预提供了建议。最后,进一步的实证研究是必要的,以解决现有的局限性,并充分了解这些干预措施的有效性,特别是关于统计焦虑。
{"title":"The Effect of Psychological Interventions on Statistics Anxiety, Statistics Self-Efficacy, and Attitudes Toward Statistics in University Students: A Systematic Review","authors":"Renata A. Mendes, Natalie J. Loxton, Nicholas G. Browning, Rebecca K. Lawrence","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09979-7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09979-7","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Psychological interventions offer a unique approach to enhancing the educational experience for university students. Unlike traditional teaching methods, these interventions directly address cognitive, emotional, and behavioural factors without requiring changes to course content, delivery methods, or involvement from the teaching team. This systematic review evaluated psychological interventions that were designed to reduce statistics anxiety, boost statistics self-efficacy, and/or foster positive attitudes toward statistics among university students enrolled in statistics courses. All included studies followed a longitudinal design with at least pre- and post-intervention assessments, comprising single group studies, randomised controlled trials, and non-randomised control studies. The protocol of this systematic review was registered with PROSPERO. Search terms were entered into five databases. The screening, assessment of risk of bias, and data extraction processes were conducted by two independent reviewers. Meta-analysis was not conducted due to the heterogeneity across the included studies. Therefore, a narrative synthesis was used to describe the results of 11 studies (1786 participants), encompassing studies targeting statistics anxiety, attitudes, self-efficacy, or a combination of these outcomes. Findings revealed that although no intervention was definitively effective in reducing statistics anxiety, some showed promise, especially those combining exposure with coping strategies. Moreover, the review identified interventions that effectively improved self-efficacy and attitudes, discussed some important methodological considerations, and provided suggestions for future psychological interventions. Finally, further empirical research is necessary to address existing limitations and fully understand the effectiveness of these interventions, particularly regarding statistics anxiety.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"574 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2025-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142929533","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:604180095
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