学术测试结果后的自发认知

IF 2.2 4区 教育学 Q1 Social Sciences
J. Möller, O. Köller
{"title":"学术测试结果后的自发认知","authors":"J. Möller, O. Köller","doi":"10.1080/00220979909598350","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Attribution research is usually based on reactive attributions demanded by the instructions themselves. However, examining spontaneous verbal reports (B. Weiner, 1985) avoids reduction to causal cognitions. In the present study, the authors used a multithematic approach focusing on causal, evaluative, and finalistic cognitions (see A. Abele, 1985; P. T. Wong & B. Weiner, 1981). In Experiment 1, spontaneous verbalizations by university students (N = 35) immediately after they had received their exam results in a statistics course were obtained. The students who performed better than they had expected tended to produce dominantly evaluative thoughts. The students who received worse results than they had expected showed an increase in causal reasoning. In Experiment 2, junior high school students (N = 96) who were uncertain of their expected grades in a math exam were more likely to spontaneously write down causal attributions following failure and to verbalize evaluative cognitions after success, w...","PeriodicalId":47911,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Education","volume":"67 1","pages":"150-164"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00220979909598350","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Spontaneous Cognitions Following Academic Test Results\",\"authors\":\"J. Möller, O. Köller\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00220979909598350\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Attribution research is usually based on reactive attributions demanded by the instructions themselves. However, examining spontaneous verbal reports (B. Weiner, 1985) avoids reduction to causal cognitions. In the present study, the authors used a multithematic approach focusing on causal, evaluative, and finalistic cognitions (see A. Abele, 1985; P. T. Wong & B. Weiner, 1981). In Experiment 1, spontaneous verbalizations by university students (N = 35) immediately after they had received their exam results in a statistics course were obtained. The students who performed better than they had expected tended to produce dominantly evaluative thoughts. The students who received worse results than they had expected showed an increase in causal reasoning. In Experiment 2, junior high school students (N = 96) who were uncertain of their expected grades in a math exam were more likely to spontaneously write down causal attributions following failure and to verbalize evaluative cognitions after success, w...\",\"PeriodicalId\":47911,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Experimental Education\",\"volume\":\"67 1\",\"pages\":\"150-164\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00220979909598350\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Experimental Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220979909598350\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220979909598350","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

归因研究通常是基于指令本身所要求的反应性归因。然而,检查自发口头报告(B. Weiner, 1985)避免了对因果认知的还原。在本研究中,作者使用了多主题方法,重点关注因果认知、评估认知和最终认知(见a . Abele, 1985;P. T. Wong & B. Weiner, 1981)。在实验1中,获得了35名大学生(N = 35)在收到统计学课程考试成绩后的自发语言表达。表现好于预期的学生倾向于产生主要的评价性想法。结果比预期差的学生表现出因果推理能力的提高。在实验2中,初中生(N = 96)在数学考试成绩不确定的情况下,失败后更倾向于自发地写下因果归因,成功后更倾向于用语言表达评估性认知。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Spontaneous Cognitions Following Academic Test Results
Abstract Attribution research is usually based on reactive attributions demanded by the instructions themselves. However, examining spontaneous verbal reports (B. Weiner, 1985) avoids reduction to causal cognitions. In the present study, the authors used a multithematic approach focusing on causal, evaluative, and finalistic cognitions (see A. Abele, 1985; P. T. Wong & B. Weiner, 1981). In Experiment 1, spontaneous verbalizations by university students (N = 35) immediately after they had received their exam results in a statistics course were obtained. The students who performed better than they had expected tended to produce dominantly evaluative thoughts. The students who received worse results than they had expected showed an increase in causal reasoning. In Experiment 2, junior high school students (N = 96) who were uncertain of their expected grades in a math exam were more likely to spontaneously write down causal attributions following failure and to verbalize evaluative cognitions after success, w...
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
6.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Education publishes theoretical, laboratory, and classroom research studies that use the range of quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Recent articles have explored the correlation between test preparation and performance, enhancing students" self-efficacy, the effects of peer collaboration among students, and arguments about statistical significance and effect size reporting. In recent issues, JXE has published examinations of statistical methodologies and editorial practices used in several educational research journals.
×
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