Educational Psychology Review最新文献

{"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}

{"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}

{"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}

{"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}

{"title":"Factors Associated with Teacher Wellbeing: A Meta-Analysis","authors":"Sijing Zhou, Gavin R. Slemp, Dianne A. Vella-Brodrick","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09886-x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09886-x","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Teacher wellbeing has received widespread and increasing global attention over the last decade due to high teacher turnover, growing teacher shortages, and the goal of improving the quality of teaching and student performance. No review has yet sought to undertake a cumulative quantitative assessment of the literature pertaining to teacher wellbeing. Using meta-analysis, we address this gap by systematically examining the relative strength of key antecedents, consequences, and correlates of teacher wellbeing, using the Job Demands-Resources theory as a guide to positioning factors in the nomological network. Following PRISMA guidelines, our systematic search yielded 173 eligible studies for inclusion (<i>N</i> = 89,876). Results showed that hope, autonomous motivation, psychological capital and job competencies were the top four strongest positive predictors of overall wellbeing, whereas neuroticism and disengagement coping were the top two strongest negative predictors. Occupational commitment was the strongest positive consequence of overall wellbeing, and turnover intentions were the strongest negative consequence. Burnout and work engagement were the strongest correlates of overall wellbeing. We also found that some effects were moderated by factors such as whether teachers were in-service or pre-service, and the educational setting (e.g., K-12, initial teacher education). Our review provides a useful empirical resource that may help guide practice in terms of how teachers, school leaders, and policy makers can support teacher wellbeing.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"51 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141320037","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}

{"title":"Revisiting the Metacognitive and Affective Model of Self-Regulated Learning: Origins, Development, and Future Directions","authors":"Anastasia Efklides, Bennett L. Schwartz","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09896-9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09896-9","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Efklides and colleagues developed the Metacognitive and Affective model of Self-Regulated Learning (MASRL) to provide a comprehensive theoretical framework of self-regulated learning (SRL). The distinguishing feature of MASRL is that it stresses metacognitive experiences and other subjective experiences (e.g., motivational, affective) as critical components of SRL. The insights underlying the model are that metacognitive experiences are related to affect, and that metacognition, motivation, and affect interact in SRL rather than function independently. Moreover, the MASRL proposes that SRL takes place at two levels, the Person and the Task X Person levels, with the latter being specific to the learning task and its demands. Although SRL can start with goal setting and planning in a top-down manner, monitoring and control processes at the Task X Person level provide input for bottom-up SRL. To highlight the theory-building process that led to the MASRL theory, we present questions that inspired its conception, its theoretical underpinnings, and current evidence supporting it. We also discuss the implications of the MASRL theory for understanding SRL in the classroom and for teacher–student interactions. Finally, we discuss open questions and issues that future research on MASRL would address in the context of educational psychology and SRL promotion.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141292687","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}

{"title":"Correction to: Citizenship in the Elementary Classroom Through the Lens of Peer Relations","authors":"Minke A. Krijnen, Bjorn G. J. Wansink, Yvonne H. M. van den Berg, Jan van Tartwijk, Tim Mainhard","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09901-1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09901-1","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141292694","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}

{"title":"Evaluating the Judgment of Learning: its Limited Impact and the Power of Retrieval on Inductive Learning","authors":"Hyorim Ha, Hee Seung Lee","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09899-6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09899-6","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Recent studies suggest that making judgments of learning (JOLs)—self-assessment of current learning status—may not merely be a neutral cognitive process, but can directly improve learning through what is called ‘JOL reactivity’. This study investigated whether making JOLs can facilitate the learning of previously studied materials (backward effect) and newly studied materials (forward effect) in inductive learning. We also examined how this effect varies depending on whether a JOL is accompanied by a retrieval attempt. Across three experiments, participants learned about various butterfly species presented in two sections (Sections A and B). Some participants made JOLs between Section A and Section B, while others did not, and then all participants took a final transfer test for both sections. In Experiment 1, merely making JOLs did not facilitate learning compared to restudy control, regardless of whether JOLs afforded covert retrieval (target-absent JOL) or not (target-present JOL). However, in Experiment 2, when participants made JOLs combined with overt retrieval prompts (retrieval practice + JOL), they outperformed the other groups in the final transfer test of Section B, showing the forward effect. Experiment 3 further revealed that the act of making JOLs combined with overt retrieval practice was as effective as (but not more than) retrieval practice without JOLs in promoting new learning. Our findings indicate that conventional forms of JOLs do not appear to enhance inductive learning; rather, they underscore the critical role of retrieval in facilitating inductive learning.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141287224","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}

{"title":"Effects of Test Anxiety on Self-Testing and Learning Performance","authors":"Shaohang Liu, Wenbo Zhao, David R. Shanks, Xiao Hu, Liang Luo, Chunliang Yang","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09882-1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09882-1","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Practice testing (i.e., practice retrieval) has been established as an effective learning strategy. Uncovering potential factors influencing self-testing usage is a prerequisite to promote its practical use. The present study reports five experiments exploring whether test anxiety (TA) and test stake (1) affect self-testing usage (Experiments 1–5) and (2) influence learning performance through their negative effects on self-testing usage (Experiments 1, 4, and 5). Experiment 1 analyzed data from 459 high school students collected via a survey and found both that TA negatively predicted students’ daily use of self-testing and that self-testing usage mediated the negative association between TA and academic performance. The negative association between TA and self-testing usage was further replicated in a laboratory experiment (Experiment 2). Another quasi-experiment (Experiment 3) showed that students were less likely to test themselves when preparing for a high-stake than a low-stake exam. Experiment 4 replicated this finding and additionally demonstrated that a high-stake test led to poorer learning via its negative influence on self-testing usage. Experiment 5 demonstrated that a high-stake test provoked high state anxiety, which then induced avoidance of self-testing and ultimately impaired learning. Overall, these findings demonstrate a negative effect of TA on self-testing usage, in turn leading to poor learning. Practical implications are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141287237","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}

{"title":"Placebo or Assistant? Generative AI Between Externalization and Anthropomorphization","authors":"Alexander Skulmowski","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09894-x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09894-x","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Generative AIs have been embraced by learners wishing to offload (parts of) complex tasks. However, recent research suggests that AI users are at risk of failing to correctly monitor the extent of their own contribution when being assisted by an AI. This difficulty in keeping track of the division of labor has been shown to result in placebo and ghostwriter effects. In case of the AI-based placebo effect, users overestimate their ability while or after being assisted by an AI. The ghostwriter effect occurs when AI users do not disclose their AI use despite being aware of the contribution made by an AI. These two troubling effects are discussed in the context of the conflict between cognitive externalization and anthropomorphization. While people tend to offload cognitive load into their environment, they also often perceive technology as human-like. However, despite the natural conversations that can be had with current AIs, the desire to attribute human-like qualities that would require the acknowledgment of AI contributions appears to be lacking. Implications and suggestions on how to improve AI use, for example, by employing embodied AI agents, are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"101 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1,"publicationDate":"2024-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141251659","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}