Hannon Brenda
Department of Psychology, The University of Saskatchewan, 9 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Int J Educ Res. 2012 Oct 1;22(5):299-310. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.11.005.
Definitions of related concepts (e.g., -) are prevalent in introductory classes. Consequently, it is important that educators and students know which strategy(s) work best for learning them. This study showed that a new comparative elaboration strategy, called differential-associative processing, was better for learning definitions of related concepts than was an integrative elaborative strategy, called example elaboration. This outcome occurred even though example elaboration was administered in a naturalistic way (Experiment 1) and students spent more time in the example elaboration condition learning (Experiments 1, 2, 3), and generating pieces of information about the concepts (Experiments 2 and 3). Further, with unrelated concepts (), performance was similar regardless if students used differential-associative processing or example elaboration (Experiment 3). Taken as a whole, these results suggest that differential-associative processing is better than example elaboration for learning definitions of related concepts and is as good as example elaboration for learning definitions of unrelated concepts.
相关概念的定义(例如,-)在入门课程中很常见。因此,教育工作者和学生了解哪种策略最适合学习这些定义非常重要。本研究表明,一种名为差异关联加工的新的比较性细化策略,在学习相关概念的定义方面比一种名为示例细化的整合性细化策略更好。即使示例细化是以自然主义的方式进行的(实验1),并且学生在示例细化条件下花费了更多时间学习(实验1、2、3),以及生成有关概念的信息片段(实验2和3),这一结果仍然出现。此外,对于不相关的概念(),无论学生使用差异关联加工还是示例细化,表现都相似(实验3)。总体而言,这些结果表明,差异关联加工在学习相关概念的定义方面优于示例细化,在学习不相关概念的定义方面与示例细化一样好。