Tailoring interleaved practice: Does adaptive sequencing boost the interleaving effect?

IF 9 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
Lea Nemeth , Johannes Osterberg , Frank Lipowsky
{"title":"Tailoring interleaved practice: Does adaptive sequencing boost the interleaving effect?","authors":"Lea Nemeth ,&nbsp;Johannes Osterberg ,&nbsp;Frank Lipowsky","doi":"10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102804","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Adaptive learning tailors instruction to learners' needs. An open question is whether potential benefits for learning also apply to adapting the sequencing of study materials. Interleaving exemplars benefits learning by fostering discriminative contrast between categories. Therefore, adapting the sequence in interleaved practice to individual learners' specific confusion patterns could boost its benefits. To test this assumption, 259 participants learned to classify paintings by six artists under blocked, random interleaved, or adaptive interleaved schedules. Blocking produced better performance and higher category learning judgments (CLJs) during study. Both interleaving conditions yielded better learning outcomes immediately and after a delay, though not higher post-study CLJs. No significant differences emerged between random and adaptive interleaving. The benefit of both interleaved conditions was independent of working memory capacity. Adaptive interleaving increased transitions between similar styles but did not reduce confusion errors. These results suggest that adaptive sequencing may not provide additional benefits beyond random interleaving.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48336,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Individual Differences","volume":"124 ","pages":"Article 102804"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning and Individual Differences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1041608025001803","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Adaptive learning tailors instruction to learners' needs. An open question is whether potential benefits for learning also apply to adapting the sequencing of study materials. Interleaving exemplars benefits learning by fostering discriminative contrast between categories. Therefore, adapting the sequence in interleaved practice to individual learners' specific confusion patterns could boost its benefits. To test this assumption, 259 participants learned to classify paintings by six artists under blocked, random interleaved, or adaptive interleaved schedules. Blocking produced better performance and higher category learning judgments (CLJs) during study. Both interleaving conditions yielded better learning outcomes immediately and after a delay, though not higher post-study CLJs. No significant differences emerged between random and adaptive interleaving. The benefit of both interleaved conditions was independent of working memory capacity. Adaptive interleaving increased transitions between similar styles but did not reduce confusion errors. These results suggest that adaptive sequencing may not provide additional benefits beyond random interleaving.
裁剪交错实践:自适应测序能促进交错效应吗?
适应性学习使教学适应学习者的需要。一个悬而未决的问题是,对学习的潜在好处是否也适用于调整学习材料的顺序。交错范例通过培养类别之间的区别对比而有利于学习。因此,调整交错练习的顺序以适应个别学习者的特定混淆模式可以提高其效益。为了验证这一假设,259名参与者学会了将6位艺术家的画作在受阻、随机交错或自适应交错的时间表下进行分类。在学习过程中,阻滞能提高学习成绩和类别学习判断。这两种交错的条件都产生了更好的学习效果,尽管没有更高的学习后clj。随机交错与自适应交错无显著差异。两种交错条件的益处与工作记忆容量无关。自适应交错增加了相似样式之间的过渡,但没有减少混淆错误。这些结果表明,适应性测序可能不会提供随机交错之外的额外好处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Learning and Individual Differences
Learning and Individual Differences PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
2.80%
发文量
86
期刊介绍: Learning and Individual Differences is a research journal devoted to publishing articles of individual differences as they relate to learning within an educational context. The Journal focuses on original empirical studies of high theoretical and methodological rigor that that make a substantial scientific contribution. Learning and Individual Differences publishes original research. Manuscripts should be no longer than 7500 words of primary text (not including tables, figures, references).
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信