提取練習效應(yīng)

1、提取練習優(yōu)勢研究 匯報概覽匯報概覽 v當前研究背景介紹 v相關(guān)實證研究報告 v總結(jié)及評價 v討論 當前研究背景介紹當前研究背景介紹 一直以來，心理學界和教育學界暗含著一條基本假設(shè)： 學習主要發(fā)生在對知識和經(jīng)驗進行編碼的階段；提取只能測 量先前學習經(jīng)驗的產(chǎn)出，但本身并不能產(chǎn)生學習。然而，美 國普渡大學Karpicke博士自2008年以來，在世界頂級雜志 科學上相繼發(fā)表的有關(guān)記憶提取的數(shù)篇文章揭示，提取并 非是學習過程中的一個中性事件，而是會對學習產(chǎn)生重要影 響的相關(guān)事件，每一次提取動作都會改變記憶和重構(gòu)知識。 v 提取式學習的基本觀點是：提取是理解學習和促進學習的 關(guān)鍵過程，提取練習能產(chǎn)生有意義

2、的學習，知識提取是由 線索驅(qū)動的目標搜索過程。 提取練習(Retrieval Practice), 又稱測試效應(yīng)(Test Effect), 是近 10 年來學習與記憶研究的熱點問題。在相關(guān) 研究基礎(chǔ)上, 有研究者指出：“提取練習策略相比于傳統(tǒng) 的學習策略, 如重復學習、過度學習, 能夠產(chǎn)生更長時間的 記憶保持” (Roediger Karpicke Karpicke Karpicke Carpenter Karpicke Roediger, 2000)。 v 人們依照當下的線索來回憶目標信息, 并依據(jù)線索排除掉 提取的競爭項, 人們每提取一次知識, 就會增加一些在未來 再次成功提取的可能性(

3、Karpicke Karpicke Rohrer, Taylor, Karpicke, 2012). v 提取練習是讓學習者不顧他們正在學習的材料，并用他們自己 的方式積極地練習重建。當學生們能夠成功地提取知識時，并 且當他們反復的練習它時，提取練習便促進學習，這種學習是 有效的、持久的，可轉(zhuǎn)化新內(nèi)容的。 v 1.2、Grades 35 represent a critical time in chil-drens educational development, because by these grade levels children have learned to read, and

4、they are now increasingly “read-ing to learn.” That is, late elementary school children are beginning to read material and implement strategies on their own in order to learn from what they are reading. Thus it is essential to examine retrieval practice in elementary school children. v 三到五年級的兒童是教育發(fā)展

5、的關(guān)鍵時期，因為這些年級的 兒童已經(jīng)學習了閱讀，并且現(xiàn)在正在增長為從閱讀中學習。 為了學習他們正在學習的內(nèi)容，這些兒童開始用他們自己的 方式讀材料并實施策略。因此，在小學兒童中檢查提取練習 是必要的。 問題提出問題提出 v 1、從教育內(nèi)容中，檢查學習以提取為基礎(chǔ)的策略。 v 2、對大學生有效的提取練習策略（自由回憶和概念地圖） 對小學生是否是有效的。 v 3、檢查對小學生有效的提取練習的新方式。 2、實驗設(shè)計、實驗設(shè)計 v Experiment 1 v 2.1Method： v 2.1.1被試 v 在實驗一中采用9到11歲的94名兒童作為被試，在學?？?人口中有52%的非裔美國人,27%的西班

6、牙裔,14%的白 人,7%其他種族/族裔。父母和孩子都同意。并不是所有的 孩子都參加了8個實驗序列，由于實驗持續(xù)四周，所以54 位兒童完成了四個條件，33個完成了3個條件，6位完成了 2個條件。 v 2.1.2 材料 v Four brief texts were adapted from elementary science text-books Each text covered a single topic (Learning More about Rocks, Surviving in the Wild, ClassifyingAnimals, and The Earths Chang

7、ing Surface). The texts were 273, 251,226, and 238 words in length v 實驗材料采用了小學科學課本的四個簡單的內(nèi)容。每一個 內(nèi)容都覆蓋一個獨立的主題（巖石的學習、野外生存、動 物的分類和地表面的變化），這些內(nèi)容分別是273、251、 226、238個單詞組成。 v The texts were modifiedto increase coherence, for example, by replacing pronouns withnouns, replacing difficult or unfamiliar words, a

8、nd adding explicitconnections among concepts in the text (see Graesser, McNamara,Louwerse, Roediger,Putnam, F(1,38) = 13.90, MSE = 0.01, p = .001, 2 2 p p = .27)， M = .21, SE = .04 . In terms of metacognitive monitoring accuracy, retrieval practice failure affected participants monitoring accuracy,

9、whereas retrieval practice success did not. In particular, retrieval failure prior to the final memory test allowed participants to adjust their predictions. That is, after retrieval failure, participants reduced their predictions and became less overconfident. In Experiment 2, we directly manipulat

10、ed retrieval success and failure to examine their effects on metacognitive monitoring accuracy. 提取練習失敗影響了被試記憶監(jiān)測的準確性，而提取成功不影響。提取練習失敗影響了被試記憶監(jiān)測的準確性，而提取成功不影響。 最后測試之前的提取失敗讓被試調(diào)整了他們的預測，也就是說提取失最后測試之前的提取失敗讓被試調(diào)整了他們的預測，也就是說提取失 敗之后，被試降低了預測，不再過分自信。敗之后，被試降低了預測，不再過分自信。 實驗實驗2直接操縱了提取的成功與失敗，來考察元認知監(jiān)測準確性的直接操縱了提取的成功與失敗，

11、來考察元認知監(jiān)測準確性的 影響。影響。 3. Experiment 2 More participants would fail to retrieve the difficult practice item than the easy practice item . Retrieval practice failure is more beneficial for metacognitive accuracy than retrieval practice success. Hypothesis: 3. Experiment 2 3.1. Method and materials 3.1.1

12、. Participants Ninety younger adults (52% male) between the ages of 18 and 29 (M = 19.74, SE = .21) participated in return for partial course credit. Participants were undergraduate students with between 12 and 16 years of education (M = 13.74, SE = .11).Across conditions, participants did not diffe

13、r in average age or education (Fs 1.5). 3.1.2. Design Experiment 2 used a 2 Condition (Easy Retrieval Practice and Difficult Retrieval Practice) 2 Performance Prediction (Original and Adjusted) mixed randomized repeated model. Participants were randomly assigned to either the Easy (n = 45) or the Di

14、fficult retrieval practice condition (n = 45) and made two performance predictions. 3.1.3. Materials and procedure We used the same 40 LithuanianEnglish paired associates as Experiment 1 from Grimaldi et al. (2010). Easy Retrieval Practice condition : recall the English equivalent of sesuo (sister)(

15、50%). 不告訴被試他們是在容易提取條件下還是困難提取 條件下，程序和實驗1大致相似。 Difficult Retrieval Practice condition : recall the English equivalent of muilas (soap)(4%). 圖圖1 實驗實驗1和實驗和實驗2中被試在初始預測和調(diào)整預測中總的百分比。中被試在初始預測和調(diào)整預測中總的百分比。 虛線為每種條件下的平均回憶成績。虛線為每種條件下的平均回憶成績。 u But results from experiment 2 do not explain why retrieval practice fa

16、ilure is better for metacognitive accuracy than retrieval success. u Practice items must be diagnostic of the final memory test (i.e., the diagnosticity assumption; Dunlosky, Rawson, therefore participants had practice with a test item that was representative, or diagnostic, of the final test. Thus,

17、 the difficult test condition benefitted participants metacognitive accuracy. 一種可能的推斷是困難提取練習項目是記憶測試的診斷，因此 被試用一個典型的診斷性的練習項目來測試。 4. Experiment 3 4.1. Method and materials 實驗實驗1 1和和2 2的結(jié)果表明，提取練習失敗對提高元認知的準的結(jié)果表明，提取練習失敗對提高元認知的準 確性比提取成功有更大的益處。確性比提取成功有更大的益處。 預測預測1 1，較高的提取失敗的數(shù)量對元認知準確性的提高比，較高的提取失敗的數(shù)量對元認知準確性的提

18、高比 較低的更有益。較低的更有益。 預測預測2 2，過多的提取失敗將會使被試過度降低預測成績，過多的提取失敗將會使被試過度降低預測成績， 導致信心不足的元認知錯誤。導致信心不足的元認知錯誤。 預測預測3 3，根據(jù)診斷假設(shè)理論（，根據(jù)診斷假設(shè)理論（ diagnosticity assumption ） (Dunlosky et al., 2002)，人們不太關(guān)心提取成功或失敗的，人們不太關(guān)心提取成功或失敗的 總體數(shù)目，而關(guān)心提取練習測試上的成績和最后測試成績總體數(shù)目，而關(guān)心提取練習測試上的成績和最后測試成績 的相似性。的相似性。 練習項目的成績和最后測試成績越相近就代表被試的元認練習項目的成績和

19、最后測試成績越相近就代表被試的元認 知準確性越好。知準確性越好。 實驗實驗3 3就是梳理這些潛在的假設(shè)，為什么提取失敗提高元就是梳理這些潛在的假設(shè)，為什么提取失敗提高元 認知的準確性。認知的準確性。 Two hundred and seventy-four younger adults (26% male) between the ages of 17 and 28 (M = 18.85, SE = .10) participated in return for partial course credit. Participants were undergraduate students wi

20、th between 12 and 16 years of education (M = 12.50, SE = .05). Participants did not differ in average age or education across conditions (Fs 1.0). 4.1.1. Participants 4.1.2. Design Experiment 3 used a 4 Condition (No Retrieval Practice Control, Easy Retrieval Practice, Medium Retrieval Practice, Dif

21、ficult Retrieval Practice Difficult) 2 Performance Prediction (Original and Adjusted) mixed randomized repeated model. Participants were randomly assigned to either the No Retrieval Practice Control (n = 68), Easy (n = 69), Medium (n = 70), or difficult retrieval practice (n = 67) and made two performance predictions. 4.1.3. Materials and procedure The materials and procedure were nearly identical to the previous experiments with the key exceptions being that participants in the retrieval practice conditions attempted to recall four practice items,