Cargando…

The effects of testing the relationships among relational concepts

Many concepts are defined by their relationships to one another. However, instructors might teach these concepts individually, neglecting their interconnections. For instance, students learning about statistical power might learn how to define alpha and beta, but not how they are related. We report...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Corral, Daniel, Healy, Alice F., Jones, Matt
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9156590/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35639213
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41235-022-00398-2
_version_ 1784718473819062272
author Corral, Daniel
Healy, Alice F.
Jones, Matt
author_facet Corral, Daniel
Healy, Alice F.
Jones, Matt
author_sort Corral, Daniel
collection PubMed
description Many concepts are defined by their relationships to one another. However, instructors might teach these concepts individually, neglecting their interconnections. For instance, students learning about statistical power might learn how to define alpha and beta, but not how they are related. We report two experiments that examine whether there is a benefit to training subjects on relations among concepts. In Experiment 1, all subjects studied material on statistical hypothesis testing, half were subsequently quizzed on relationships among these concepts, and the other half were quizzed on their individual definitions; quizzing was used to highlight the information that was being trained in each condition (i.e., relations or definitions). Experiment 2 also included a mixed training condition that quizzed both relations and definitions, and a control condition that only included study. Subjects were then tested on both types of questions and on three conceptually related question types. In Experiment 1, subjects trained on relations performed numerically better on relational test questions than subjects trained on definitions (nonsignificant trend), whereas definitional test questions showed the reverse pattern; no performance differences were found between the groups on the other question types. In Experiment 2, relational training benefitted performance on relational test questions and on some question types that were not quizzed, whereas definitional training only benefited performance on test questions on the trained definitions. In contrast, mixed training did not aid learning above and beyond studying. Relational training thus seems to facilitate transfer of learning, whereas definitional training seems to produce training specificity effects. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41235-022-00398-2.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9156590
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91565902022-06-02 The effects of testing the relationships among relational concepts Corral, Daniel Healy, Alice F. Jones, Matt Cogn Res Princ Implic Original Article Many concepts are defined by their relationships to one another. However, instructors might teach these concepts individually, neglecting their interconnections. For instance, students learning about statistical power might learn how to define alpha and beta, but not how they are related. We report two experiments that examine whether there is a benefit to training subjects on relations among concepts. In Experiment 1, all subjects studied material on statistical hypothesis testing, half were subsequently quizzed on relationships among these concepts, and the other half were quizzed on their individual definitions; quizzing was used to highlight the information that was being trained in each condition (i.e., relations or definitions). Experiment 2 also included a mixed training condition that quizzed both relations and definitions, and a control condition that only included study. Subjects were then tested on both types of questions and on three conceptually related question types. In Experiment 1, subjects trained on relations performed numerically better on relational test questions than subjects trained on definitions (nonsignificant trend), whereas definitional test questions showed the reverse pattern; no performance differences were found between the groups on the other question types. In Experiment 2, relational training benefitted performance on relational test questions and on some question types that were not quizzed, whereas definitional training only benefited performance on test questions on the trained definitions. In contrast, mixed training did not aid learning above and beyond studying. Relational training thus seems to facilitate transfer of learning, whereas definitional training seems to produce training specificity effects. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41235-022-00398-2. Springer International Publishing 2022-05-31 /pmc/articles/PMC9156590/ /pubmed/35639213 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41235-022-00398-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Corral, Daniel
Healy, Alice F.
Jones, Matt
The effects of testing the relationships among relational concepts
title The effects of testing the relationships among relational concepts
title_full The effects of testing the relationships among relational concepts
title_fullStr The effects of testing the relationships among relational concepts
title_full_unstemmed The effects of testing the relationships among relational concepts
title_short The effects of testing the relationships among relational concepts
title_sort effects of testing the relationships among relational concepts
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9156590/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35639213
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41235-022-00398-2
work_keys_str_mv AT corraldaniel theeffectsoftestingtherelationshipsamongrelationalconcepts
AT healyalicef theeffectsoftestingtherelationshipsamongrelationalconcepts
AT jonesmatt theeffectsoftestingtherelationshipsamongrelationalconcepts
AT corraldaniel effectsoftestingtherelationshipsamongrelationalconcepts
AT healyalicef effectsoftestingtherelationshipsamongrelationalconcepts
AT jonesmatt effectsoftestingtherelationshipsamongrelationalconcepts