• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

学生是否会根据题目难度有效调节自我测试的使用?

Do Students Effectively Regulate Their Use of Self-Testing as a Function of Item Difficulty?

作者信息

Badali Sabrina, Rawson Katherine A, Dunlosky John

机构信息

Department of Psychological Sciences, Kent State University, P.O. Box 5190, Kent, OH 44242-0001 USA.

出版信息

Educ Psychol Rev. 2022;34(3):1651-1677. doi: 10.1007/s10648-022-09665-6. Epub 2022 Mar 5.

DOI:10.1007/s10648-022-09665-6
PMID:35283609
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8897551/
Abstract

Retrieval practice is beneficial for both easy-to-learn and difficult-to-learn materials, but scant research has examined students' use of self-testing for items of varying difficulty. In two experiments, we investigated whether students differentially regulate their use of self-testing for easy and difficult items and assessed the effectiveness of students' self-regulated choices. Undergraduate participants learned normatively easy and normatively difficult Lithuanian-English word pair translations. After an initial study trial, participants in the self-regulated learning groups chose whether they wanted to restudy an item, take a practice test, or remove an item from further practice. Participants chose to test items repeatedly while learning but dropped both easy and difficult items after reaching a criterion of about one correct recall per item. Consequently, final test performance 2 days later was lower for difficult items versus easy items, and performance was lower in the self-regulated learning group than in an experimenter-controlled comparison group (in Experiment 1). In Experiment 2, we tested hypotheses for participants reached a similar number of correct recalls for both easy and difficult items. Three new groups included different scaffolds aimed at minimizing potential barriers to effective regulation. These scaffolds did not change participants' learning choices, and as a result, performance on difficult items was still lower than on easy items. Importantly, participants planned to continue practicing items beyond one correct recall and believed that an optimal student should practice difficult items more than easy items, but they did not execute this plan during the learning task.

摘要

检索练习对易于学习和难以学习的材料都有益,但很少有研究考察学生对不同难度项目的自我测试使用情况。在两项实验中,我们调查了学生是否对简单和困难项目的自我测试使用进行差异化调节,并评估了学生自我调节选择的有效性。本科参与者学习了规范上简单和规范上困难的立陶宛语 - 英语单词对翻译。在初步学习试验后,自我调节学习组的参与者选择他们是想重新学习一个项目、进行一次练习测试,还是将一个项目从进一步练习中移除。参与者在学习时选择反复测试项目,但在达到每个项目约一次正确回忆的标准后,放弃了简单和困难的项目。因此,两天后的最终测试中,困难项目的表现低于简单项目,并且在自我调节学习组中的表现低于实验者控制的比较组(实验1)。在实验2中,我们针对简单和困难项目达到相似正确回忆次数的参与者测试了假设。三个新组包括不同的支架,旨在最小化有效调节的潜在障碍。这些支架没有改变参与者的学习选择,结果,困难项目的表现仍然低于简单项目。重要的是,参与者计划在一次正确回忆之后继续练习项目,并认为一个优秀的学生应该比简单项目更多地练习困难项目,但他们在学习任务中没有执行这个计划。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6a76/8897551/3d3523b90bb1/10648_2022_9665_Fig5_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6a76/8897551/85adeee2411d/10648_2022_9665_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6a76/8897551/6dac4442608e/10648_2022_9665_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6a76/8897551/3d3523b90bb1/10648_2022_9665_Fig5_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6a76/8897551/85adeee2411d/10648_2022_9665_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6a76/8897551/6dac4442608e/10648_2022_9665_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6a76/8897551/3d3523b90bb1/10648_2022_9665_Fig5_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Do Students Effectively Regulate Their Use of Self-Testing as a Function of Item Difficulty?学生是否会根据题目难度有效调节自我测试的使用?
Educ Psychol Rev. 2022;34(3):1651-1677. doi: 10.1007/s10648-022-09665-6. Epub 2022 Mar 5.
2
Repeated retrieval practice and item difficulty: does criterion learning eliminate item difficulty effects?反复提取练习和项目难度:标准学习是否消除项目难度效应?
Psychon Bull Rev. 2013 Dec;20(6):1239-45. doi: 10.3758/s13423-013-0434-z.
3
How do Students Regulate Their Use of Multiple Choice Practice Tests?学生如何规范他们对多项选择题练习测试的使用?
Educ Psychol Rev. 2023;35(2):43. doi: 10.1007/s10648-023-09761-1. Epub 2023 Mar 30.
4
Does Item Difficulty Affect the Magnitude of the Retrieval Practice Effect? An Evaluation of the Retrieval Effort Hypothesis.项目难度是否影响检索练习效应的大小?对检索努力假说的评估。
Span J Psychol. 2020 Aug 10;23:e31. doi: 10.1017/SJP.2020.33.
5
Metacognitive control in self-regulated learning: Conditions affecting the choice of restudying versus retrieval practice.自我调节学习中的元认知控制:影响选择重新学习与检索练习的条件。
Mem Cognit. 2018 Oct;46(7):1164-1177. doi: 10.3758/s13421-018-0828-2.
6
The benefits of retrieval practice depend on item difficulty and intelligence.检索练习的益处取决于项目难度和智力水平。
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2018 Sep;44(9):1474-1486. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000486. Epub 2018 Apr 12.
7
Are undergraduate examinees' perceptions of item difficulty related to item characteristics?本科应试者对试题难度的认知与试题特征有关吗?
Percept Mot Skills. 2002 Dec;95(3 Pt 2):1281-6. doi: 10.2466/pms.2002.95.3f.1281.
8
Improving Students' Learning With Effective Learning Techniques: Promising Directions From Cognitive and Educational Psychology.运用有效的学习技巧提高学生的学习效果:认知和教育心理学的有前景方向。
Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2013 Jan;14(1):4-58. doi: 10.1177/1529100612453266.
9
Toward an understanding of students' allocation of study time: why do they decide to mass or space their practice?理解学生学习时间分配:他们为什么决定集中或分散练习?
Mem Cognit. 2010 Jun;38(4):431-40. doi: 10.3758/MC.38.4.431.
10
Metacognitive control and strategy selection: deciding to practice retrieval during learning.元认知控制与策略选择:在学习中决定进行检索练习。
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2009 Nov;138(4):469-86. doi: 10.1037/a0017341.

引用本文的文献

1
How do Students Regulate Their Use of Multiple Choice Practice Tests?学生如何规范他们对多项选择题练习测试的使用?
Educ Psychol Rev. 2023;35(2):43. doi: 10.1007/s10648-023-09761-1. Epub 2023 Mar 30.