用因果关系图表提高学生的监测准确性和文本理解能力:图表标准和自我评分指导的效果

IF 2.1 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Applied Cognitive Psychology Pub Date : 2024-01-16 DOI:10.1002/acp.4170
Sophia Braumann, Margot van Wermeskerken, Janneke van de Pol, Héctor J. Pijeira-Díaz, Anique B. H. de Bruin, Tamara van Gog
{"title":"用因果关系图表提高学生的监测准确性和文本理解能力:图表标准和自我评分指导的效果","authors":"Sophia Braumann,&nbsp;Margot van Wermeskerken,&nbsp;Janneke van de Pol,&nbsp;Héctor J. Pijeira-Díaz,&nbsp;Anique B. H. de Bruin,&nbsp;Tamara van Gog","doi":"10.1002/acp.4170","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Students' monitoring of their text comprehension must be accurate for self-regulated learning to be effective. Completing causal diagrams after reading (i.e., diagramming) already improves students' monitoring accuracy to some extent. We investigated whether providing secondary school students with a standard (i.e., correctly completed) diagram and self-scoring instructions would further improve their monitoring accuracy and text comprehension in a delayed (Experiment 1; <i>n</i> = 98) or immediate (Experiment 2; <i>n</i> = 177) diagramming design. Self-scoring instructions did not improve monitoring accuracy or text comprehension compared to the control condition(s) in either experiment. Presumably, students self-scored their diagrams even without instructions to do so. In contrast to findings from prior diagramming research without standards, an explorative analysis suggests that delayed and immediate diagramming did not produce differences in monitoring accuracy. Immediate diagramming, however, led to better text comprehension than delayed diagramming and may therefore be preferable over delayed diagramming under certain conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":48281,"journal":{"name":"Applied Cognitive Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/acp.4170","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Causal diagramming to improve students' monitoring accuracy and text comprehension: Effects of diagram standards and self-scoring instructions\",\"authors\":\"Sophia Braumann,&nbsp;Margot van Wermeskerken,&nbsp;Janneke van de Pol,&nbsp;Héctor J. Pijeira-Díaz,&nbsp;Anique B. H. de Bruin,&nbsp;Tamara van Gog\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/acp.4170\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Students' monitoring of their text comprehension must be accurate for self-regulated learning to be effective. Completing causal diagrams after reading (i.e., diagramming) already improves students' monitoring accuracy to some extent. We investigated whether providing secondary school students with a standard (i.e., correctly completed) diagram and self-scoring instructions would further improve their monitoring accuracy and text comprehension in a delayed (Experiment 1; <i>n</i> = 98) or immediate (Experiment 2; <i>n</i> = 177) diagramming design. Self-scoring instructions did not improve monitoring accuracy or text comprehension compared to the control condition(s) in either experiment. Presumably, students self-scored their diagrams even without instructions to do so. In contrast to findings from prior diagramming research without standards, an explorative analysis suggests that delayed and immediate diagramming did not produce differences in monitoring accuracy. Immediate diagramming, however, led to better text comprehension than delayed diagramming and may therefore be preferable over delayed diagramming under certain conditions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48281,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Cognitive Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/acp.4170\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Cognitive Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acp.4170\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Cognitive Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acp.4170","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

学生对文本理解的监控必须准确,自我调节学习才能有效。在阅读后完成因果关系图(即图解)已经在一定程度上提高了学生监测的准确性。我们研究了在延迟(实验 1; n = 98)或即时(实验 2; n = 177)图表设计中,为中学生提供标准(即正确完成)图表和自我评分指导是否会进一步提高他们的监控准确性和文本理解能力。在这两个实验中,与对照条件相比,自我评分指导并没有提高监控的准确性或文字理解能力。据推测,即使没有指导,学生也会对他们的图表进行自我评分。与之前没有标准的图表绘制研究结果不同的是,探索性分析表明,延迟和立即绘制图表在监控准确性方面没有产生差异。然而,即时作图比延迟作图能更好地理解文章,因此在某些条件下,即时作图可能比延迟作图更可取。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Causal diagramming to improve students' monitoring accuracy and text comprehension: Effects of diagram standards and self-scoring instructions

Students' monitoring of their text comprehension must be accurate for self-regulated learning to be effective. Completing causal diagrams after reading (i.e., diagramming) already improves students' monitoring accuracy to some extent. We investigated whether providing secondary school students with a standard (i.e., correctly completed) diagram and self-scoring instructions would further improve their monitoring accuracy and text comprehension in a delayed (Experiment 1; n = 98) or immediate (Experiment 2; n = 177) diagramming design. Self-scoring instructions did not improve monitoring accuracy or text comprehension compared to the control condition(s) in either experiment. Presumably, students self-scored their diagrams even without instructions to do so. In contrast to findings from prior diagramming research without standards, an explorative analysis suggests that delayed and immediate diagramming did not produce differences in monitoring accuracy. Immediate diagramming, however, led to better text comprehension than delayed diagramming and may therefore be preferable over delayed diagramming under certain conditions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Cognitive Psychology
Applied Cognitive Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
111
期刊介绍: Applied Cognitive Psychology seeks to publish the best papers dealing with psychological analyses of memory, learning, thinking, problem solving, language, and consciousness as they occur in the real world. Applied Cognitive Psychology will publish papers on a wide variety of issues and from diverse theoretical perspectives. The journal focuses on studies of human performance and basic cognitive skills in everyday environments including, but not restricted to, studies of eyewitness memory, autobiographical memory, spatial cognition, skill training, expertise and skilled behaviour. Articles will normally combine realistic investigations of real world events with appropriate theoretical analyses and proper appraisal of practical implications.
期刊最新文献
How much trait variance is captured in autobiographical memory ratings? Issue Information Methodological improvements for studying face matching in border control tasks Examining the impact of interviewer rejections following “Don't know” responses in forensic interviews of alleged preschool-aged victims of abuse Consumer choice of compromise option and activated styles of thinking: Experimental evidence
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
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
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
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
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