心理学讲座中的检索实践效果:说明学习设计、项目难度和相关测量方法选择的相关性

IF 1.9 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Jonathan Barenberg, S. Dutke
{"title":"心理学讲座中的检索实践效果:说明学习设计、项目难度和相关测量方法选择的相关性","authors":"Jonathan Barenberg, S. Dutke","doi":"10.1177/14757257211049312","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study investigated the effects of retrieval practice on the cognitive and metacognitive learning outcome in a psychology lecture at university. In a within-subjects design, N  =  180 students completed an intermediate knowledge test in the 9th session and a final test in the 13th session of the semester. Both tests assessed students’ correctness of answering and confidence in their answers. In the final test, items that were intermediately tested were answered as correctly as items that were not intermediately tested. The failure to find a testing effect at the level of cognitive performance could not be attributed to interference with item difficulty, as intermediately tested and not tested items were balanced according to their a priori difficulty. However, testing improved performance at the metacognitive level. Confidence ratings were more accurate and less biased in items that were intermediately tested compared to items not intermediately tested. The results are discussed in the context of metacognitive monitoring as a condition of self-regulated learning in an authentic psychology learning context.","PeriodicalId":45061,"journal":{"name":"Psychology Learning and Teaching-PLAT","volume":"21 1","pages":"99 - 112"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Retrieval Practice Effects in a Psychology Lecture: Illustrating the Relevance of Study Design, Item Difficulty, and Selection of Dependent Measures\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan Barenberg, S. Dutke\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14757257211049312\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study investigated the effects of retrieval practice on the cognitive and metacognitive learning outcome in a psychology lecture at university. In a within-subjects design, N  =  180 students completed an intermediate knowledge test in the 9th session and a final test in the 13th session of the semester. Both tests assessed students’ correctness of answering and confidence in their answers. In the final test, items that were intermediately tested were answered as correctly as items that were not intermediately tested. The failure to find a testing effect at the level of cognitive performance could not be attributed to interference with item difficulty, as intermediately tested and not tested items were balanced according to their a priori difficulty. However, testing improved performance at the metacognitive level. Confidence ratings were more accurate and less biased in items that were intermediately tested compared to items not intermediately tested. The results are discussed in the context of metacognitive monitoring as a condition of self-regulated learning in an authentic psychology learning context.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45061,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychology Learning and Teaching-PLAT\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"99 - 112\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychology Learning and Teaching-PLAT\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14757257211049312\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology Learning and Teaching-PLAT","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14757257211049312","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

本研究在大学心理学讲座中调查了检索实践对认知和元认知学习结果的影响。在受试者内部设计中,N  =  180名学生在本学期第9节完成了中级知识测试,在第13节完成了期末测试。这两项测试都评估了学生回答的正确性和对答案的信心。在最后的测试中,中间测试的项目和未中间测试的测试项目的答案一样正确。未能在认知表现水平上找到测试效果不能归因于对项目难度的干扰,因为中间测试和未测试的项目根据其先验难度进行平衡。然而,测试提高了元认知水平的表现。与未进行中间测试的项目相比,进行中间测试项目的置信度更准确,偏差更小。这些结果是在元认知监控的背景下进行讨论的,元认知监控是在真实的心理学学习背景下进行自我调节学习的条件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Retrieval Practice Effects in a Psychology Lecture: Illustrating the Relevance of Study Design, Item Difficulty, and Selection of Dependent Measures
This study investigated the effects of retrieval practice on the cognitive and metacognitive learning outcome in a psychology lecture at university. In a within-subjects design, N  =  180 students completed an intermediate knowledge test in the 9th session and a final test in the 13th session of the semester. Both tests assessed students’ correctness of answering and confidence in their answers. In the final test, items that were intermediately tested were answered as correctly as items that were not intermediately tested. The failure to find a testing effect at the level of cognitive performance could not be attributed to interference with item difficulty, as intermediately tested and not tested items were balanced according to their a priori difficulty. However, testing improved performance at the metacognitive level. Confidence ratings were more accurate and less biased in items that were intermediately tested compared to items not intermediately tested. The results are discussed in the context of metacognitive monitoring as a condition of self-regulated learning in an authentic psychology learning context.
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
Psychology Learning and Teaching-PLAT
Psychology Learning and Teaching-PLAT PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
9.10%
发文量
24
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信