{"title":"全身描画和手部描画有区别吗？大学生学习成果、认知负荷和内在动机的实验证据","authors":"Genmei Zuo, Lijia Lin","doi":"10.1007/s11251-024-09664-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The purpose of the study was to investigate (a) whether the effects of hand tracing and whole-body tracing reported in the literature could be extended to adults, and (b) the relative superiority of whole-body tracing over hand tracing. Two experiments were conducted to investigate the potential effects of these two kinesthetic approaches on learning outcomes, cognitive load, and intrinsic motivation. The results of Experiment 1 revealed that hand tracing enhanced germane load contingent upon a low-to-medium level of perceived difficulty. This effect disappeared in Experiment 2 where additional measures were taken to improve treatment fidelity. The findings of Experiment 2 revealed the beneficial effects of whole-body tracing on germane load, extraneous load, interest, and self-monitoring, some of which were dependent upon learners’ perceived difficulty and invested effort. These findings, along with implications, limitations, and future research directions, were discussed within the framework of cognitive load theory and embodied cognition theory.</p>","PeriodicalId":47990,"journal":{"name":"Instructional Science","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can whole-body tracing and hand tracing make any difference? Experimental evidence of learning outcomes, cognitive load, and intrinsic motivation on university students\",\"authors\":\"Genmei Zuo, Lijia Lin\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11251-024-09664-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The purpose of the study was to investigate (a) whether the effects of hand tracing and whole-body tracing reported in the literature could be extended to adults, and (b) the relative superiority of whole-body tracing over hand tracing. Two experiments were conducted to investigate the potential effects of these two kinesthetic approaches on learning outcomes, cognitive load, and intrinsic motivation. The results of Experiment 1 revealed that hand tracing enhanced germane load contingent upon a low-to-medium level of perceived difficulty. This effect disappeared in Experiment 2 where additional measures were taken to improve treatment fidelity. The findings of Experiment 2 revealed the beneficial effects of whole-body tracing on germane load, extraneous load, interest, and self-monitoring, some of which were dependent upon learners’ perceived difficulty and invested effort. These findings, along with implications, limitations, and future research directions, were discussed within the framework of cognitive load theory and embodied cognition theory.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47990,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Instructional Science\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Instructional Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-024-09664-w\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Instructional Science","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-024-09664-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Can whole-body tracing and hand tracing make any difference? Experimental evidence of learning outcomes, cognitive load, and intrinsic motivation on university students
The purpose of the study was to investigate (a) whether the effects of hand tracing and whole-body tracing reported in the literature could be extended to adults, and (b) the relative superiority of whole-body tracing over hand tracing. Two experiments were conducted to investigate the potential effects of these two kinesthetic approaches on learning outcomes, cognitive load, and intrinsic motivation. The results of Experiment 1 revealed that hand tracing enhanced germane load contingent upon a low-to-medium level of perceived difficulty. This effect disappeared in Experiment 2 where additional measures were taken to improve treatment fidelity. The findings of Experiment 2 revealed the beneficial effects of whole-body tracing on germane load, extraneous load, interest, and self-monitoring, some of which were dependent upon learners’ perceived difficulty and invested effort. These findings, along with implications, limitations, and future research directions, were discussed within the framework of cognitive load theory and embodied cognition theory.
期刊介绍：
Instructional Science, An International Journal of the Learning Sciences, promotes a deeper understanding of the nature, theory, and practice of learning and of environments in which learning occurs. The journal’s conception of learning, as well as of instruction, is broad, recognizing that there are many ways to stimulate and support learning. The journal encourages submission of research papers, covering a variety of perspectives from the learning sciences and learning, by people of all ages, in all areas of the curriculum, in technologically rich or lean environments, and in informal and formal learning contexts. Emphasizing reports of original empirical research, the journal provides space for full and detailed reporting of major studies. Regardless of the topic, papers published in the journal all make an explicit contribution to the science of learning and instruction by drawing out the implications for the design and implementation of learning environments. We particularly encourage the submission of papers that highlight the interaction between learning processes and learning environments, focus on meaningful learning, and recognize the role of context. Papers are characterized by methodological variety that ranges, for example, from experimental studies in laboratory settings, to qualitative studies, to design-based research in authentic learning settings. The Editors will occasionally invite experts to write a review article on an important topic in the field. When review articles are considered for publication, they must deal with central issues in the domain of learning and learning environments. The journal accepts replication studies. Such a study should replicate an important and seminal finding in the field, from a study which was originally conducted by a different research group. Most years, Instructional Science publishes a guest-edited thematic special issue on a topic central to the journal''s scope. Proposals for special issues can be sent to the Editor-in-Chief. Proposals will be discussed in Spring and Fall of each year, and the proposers will be notified afterwards. To be considered for the Spring and Fall discussion, proposals should be sent to the Editor-in-Chief by March 1 and October 1, respectively. Please note that articles that are submitted for a special issue will follow the same review process as regular articles.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
