O'Reilly T, Symons S, MacLatchy-Gaudet H
University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Contemp Educ Psychol. 1998 Oct;23(4):434-445. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1997.0977.
The purpose of the present study was to examine the effectiveness of two learning strategies, self-explanation and elaborative interrogation, for the retention of scientific facts. University students (N = 55) were asked to learn facts about the cardiovascular system using one of three approaches. Self-explanation participants were required to explain what the facts meant to them and how they related to their prior knowledge. Elaborative interrogation participants answered "why" the facts made sense. Finally, the control group simply repeated the facts aloud. Self-explanation participants significantly outperformed elaborative interrogation and repetition control participants on measures of cued recall and recognition. Elaborative interrogation was no more effective than repetition. Results were discussed in terms of the practicality and flexibility of each approach. Copyright 1998 Academic Press.
本研究的目的是检验自我解释和精细提问这两种学习策略对科学事实记忆的有效性。大学生(N = 55)被要求使用三种方法之一来学习有关心血管系统的事实。自我解释组的参与者需要解释这些事实对他们意味着什么以及它们与他们的先验知识有何关联。精细提问组的参与者回答这些事实“为什么”有意义。最后,对照组只是大声重复这些事实。在线索回忆和识别测试中,自我解释组的参与者显著优于精细提问组和重复对照组的参与者。精细提问并不比重复更有效。根据每种方法的实用性和灵活性对结果进行了讨论。版权所有1998年学术出版社。