使用“必须拥有”和“可以拥有”的特征来提高概念性学习

IF 1.9 3区 心理学 Q4 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Catherine L. Williams, Claire C. St. Peter, Michael Perone, Marisela Aguilar, Benjamin A. Cederberg, Daniella J. Gregersen, Elijah J. Richardson
{"title":"使用“必须拥有”和“可以拥有”的特征来提高概念性学习","authors":"Catherine L. Williams,&nbsp;Claire C. St. Peter,&nbsp;Michael Perone,&nbsp;Marisela Aguilar,&nbsp;Benjamin A. Cederberg,&nbsp;Daniella J. Gregersen,&nbsp;Elijah J. Richardson","doi":"10.1002/jeab.70037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Concepts can be taught by presenting examples and nonexamples and giving the learner feedback on whether they accurately identify the examples, but it is not clear how to select examples and nonexamples. Specifically, the degree to which examples and nonexamples should differ is unknown. Six experiments were conducted to compare conceptual learning for four stimulus sets (three sets of arbitrary stimuli and one set of biological stimuli) across up to three practice conditions: (a) nonexamples that were relatively similar to the examples, (b) nonexamples that were relatively dissimilar to the examples, and (c) examples only. Conceptual learning was measured before and after practice using tests with examples and nonexamples that were not used during practice. Including nonexamples in practice increased the likelihood of conceptual learning relative to including only examples. Using nonexamples that were more similar to the examples resulted in the most robust conceptual learning. Adding new but conceptually irrelevant features to the testing stimuli disrupted conceptual learning but less so when the practice included nonexamples that were more similar to the examples. The efficacy and efficiency of instruction for conceptual learning were affected by features of the stimuli used to practice and test conceptual learning.</p>","PeriodicalId":17411,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior","volume":"124 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jeab.70037","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using must-have and can-have features to improve conceptual learning\",\"authors\":\"Catherine L. Williams,&nbsp;Claire C. St. Peter,&nbsp;Michael Perone,&nbsp;Marisela Aguilar,&nbsp;Benjamin A. Cederberg,&nbsp;Daniella J. Gregersen,&nbsp;Elijah J. Richardson\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jeab.70037\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Concepts can be taught by presenting examples and nonexamples and giving the learner feedback on whether they accurately identify the examples, but it is not clear how to select examples and nonexamples. Specifically, the degree to which examples and nonexamples should differ is unknown. Six experiments were conducted to compare conceptual learning for four stimulus sets (three sets of arbitrary stimuli and one set of biological stimuli) across up to three practice conditions: (a) nonexamples that were relatively similar to the examples, (b) nonexamples that were relatively dissimilar to the examples, and (c) examples only. Conceptual learning was measured before and after practice using tests with examples and nonexamples that were not used during practice. Including nonexamples in practice increased the likelihood of conceptual learning relative to including only examples. Using nonexamples that were more similar to the examples resulted in the most robust conceptual learning. Adding new but conceptually irrelevant features to the testing stimuli disrupted conceptual learning but less so when the practice included nonexamples that were more similar to the examples. The efficacy and efficiency of instruction for conceptual learning were affected by features of the stimuli used to practice and test conceptual learning.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17411,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior\",\"volume\":\"124 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jeab.70037\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jeab.70037\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jeab.70037","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

概念可以通过举例和非举例来教授,并反馈学习者是否准确地识别了例子,但如何选择例子和非举例并不清楚。具体来说,例子和非例子的差异程度是未知的。在多达三种练习条件下,进行了六个实验来比较四种刺激集(三组任意刺激和一组生物刺激)的概念学习:(a)与示例相对相似的非示例,(b)与示例相对不相似的非示例,以及(c)只有示例。概念学习在练习前和练习后使用示例和非示例测试进行测量。在实践中包含非示例比只包含示例增加了概念学习的可能性。使用与示例更相似的非示例导致最稳健的概念学习。在测试刺激中添加新的但概念上不相关的特征会破坏概念学习,但当练习中包含与示例更相似的非示例时,这种影响会减弱。概念学习教学的效果和效率受到用于练习和测试概念学习的刺激特征的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Using must-have and can-have features to improve conceptual learning

Using must-have and can-have features to improve conceptual learning

Concepts can be taught by presenting examples and nonexamples and giving the learner feedback on whether they accurately identify the examples, but it is not clear how to select examples and nonexamples. Specifically, the degree to which examples and nonexamples should differ is unknown. Six experiments were conducted to compare conceptual learning for four stimulus sets (three sets of arbitrary stimuli and one set of biological stimuli) across up to three practice conditions: (a) nonexamples that were relatively similar to the examples, (b) nonexamples that were relatively dissimilar to the examples, and (c) examples only. Conceptual learning was measured before and after practice using tests with examples and nonexamples that were not used during practice. Including nonexamples in practice increased the likelihood of conceptual learning relative to including only examples. Using nonexamples that were more similar to the examples resulted in the most robust conceptual learning. Adding new but conceptually irrelevant features to the testing stimuli disrupted conceptual learning but less so when the practice included nonexamples that were more similar to the examples. The efficacy and efficiency of instruction for conceptual learning were affected by features of the stimuli used to practice and test conceptual learning.

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
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
14.80%
发文量
83
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior is primarily for the original publication of experiments relevant to the behavior of individual organisms.
×
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