学习策略的训练

策略是在信息加工活动中个体根据一定要求和情况的发展而采用的一些解决问题的方式。现代心理学则把策略看成是有助于获得、贮存和利用信息的加工步骤。策略的优劣,反映着思维方法的有效程度,因为策略也就是思维能力的使用。所以,灵活有效地使用策略、可以使问题得以解决。许多研究发现,专家与新手在解决问题中的思维模式。的差异主要也是策略方面的差异。     

中学生问题解决策略的基本特征研究

实验通过人—机界面,对中学生解决几何问题策略的基本特征进行探讨。对学习成绩优、差学生,在解决问题的程序上和解决问题结果的正确与错误上的差异比较后显示：学习成绩优、差学生在解决问题的程序上,尤其在问题解决的思考推理方向上没有类似专家和新手之间的显著差异;学习成绩的优、差对解决问题结果的正确与错误上具有直接的影响;问题解决规则的选择对问题解决过程具有间接影响;对问题解决规则的掌握对问题解决的结果具有重要影响。     

专家和新手不确定决策认知过程的比较研究

本研究将风险投资决策作为不确定决策任务,采用专家-新手比较研究范型,通过出声思维法和访谈法,探讨了专家和新手不确定决策认知过程的差异。研究发现,这种差异体现在专家和新手所拥有的关于决策任务的认识和观念、决策信息选择、推理过程和决策策略等方面。     

无提示条件下初中生记忆策略发展水平的实验研究

一、引言策略,是指完成作业、解决问题的方式。它在人类认知活动中居重要地位。许多研究发现,专家和新手之间在解决问题中的差异主要属于策略方面的差异。信息加工过程的策略包括注意的策略、记忆策略、思维和问题解决策略等。记忆策略是其中的主要内容。记忆策略的获得,可以有效地提高记忆效率,为提高思维能力、提高解决问题的能力提供基础。本研究主要拟对中学生记忆策略的发展水平问题作一探讨。     

新手和专家警察对犯罪嫌疑人面部和情绪躯体语言识别的ERP研究

本文采用脑电技术通过混合因素设计对专家与新手警察识别犯罪嫌疑人说真话和假话时的面部和情绪躯体语言的ERPs进行了研究。结果表明,在350~550ms时窗的P300成分上,在真话面部和情绪躯体语言以及假话情绪躯体语言上,专家警察都比新警察的振幅更正,差异表现在额区和中央区;在550~800ms的晚期慢波成分上,对于嫌犯说假话时的面部表情刺激,出现了效应的反转,新手比专家警察的振幅更正,差异位于枕叶。以上结果表明,具有长期审讯经验的专家警察对于嫌犯的真假话表情识别主要在于对这些刺激的分析和判断的认知过程上显著强于新手警察,且更加关注嫌犯的情绪躯体语言,而新手警察对嫌犯的谎言行为虽然也有一定的敏感性,但仍停留在对嫌犯面部表情的持续注意上,无法形成正确的判断。     

网球运动专长对深度运动知觉影响的ERP研究

结合专家-新手范式与ERP技术,研究网球运动专长对个体深度运动知觉产生的影响。通过记录网球专家和新手各19名进行深度运动模式判断时的行为和ERP数据,比较两组个体深度运动知觉的行为反应差异和脑电特征。结果显示,网球专家组深度运动知觉的判断准确率高于新手组;新手组在球体靠近时P1(PO7点)的潜伏期比球体远离时的潜伏期长,专家组无显著性差异;专家组在球体靠近时的P2(Oz点)成分潜伏期长于球体远离时的潜伏期。结果表明,网球运动专家的深度运动知觉能力在准确性上较新手高;运动专长效应与选择性注意资源的调用以及模式识别有关;枕区P2成分可作为深度运动知觉的评价指标。     

专家与新手教师内隐与外显学习的比较

教师作为典型的知识密集、技术密集的群体,其隐性知识也自然比较集中和典型,而专长研究可以有效地揭示教师的知识获取特点和学习规律。然而,以往的专长研究往往通过测量专家教师和新手教师在某方面的外显行为或外显知识的差异了解教师的知识结构和行为特点,这种做法由于忽略了教师的内隐学习和隐性知识,因此难以有效地揭示专家教师与新手教师在知识和能力结构上的真实差异。本研究借鉴认知心理学对专长的研究方式（即专家--新手比较）,运用经典的序列反应时任务（SRT）调整后的范式,采用带颜色边框的同一个学生的四种真实课堂表情图片作为刺激材料,以表情作为内隐学习的维度,以颜色作为外显学习的维度,对61名专家教师与88名新手教师在内隐/外显序列学习上的差异进行了比较研究。结果发现：（1）专家和新手教师被试群体均能够习得内隐/外显序列规则;（2）专家教师与新手教师在内隐学习上存在显著差异,专家教师内隐学习效果要优于新手教师;（2）专家教师与新手教师在外显学习维度上差异并不显著。结论：专家教师与新手教师有着近乎相当的外显学习能力和外显知识水平,但专家教师的内隐学习能力和隐性知识水平要显著高于新手教师。     

知识图式对贝叶斯推理的影响

选取具有概率知识的大学生(专家)和没有概率知识的大学生(新手)为被试,进行贝叶斯推理中的概率估计,探讨知识图式对贝叶斯推理的影响。结果表明,具有概率知识背景的大学生比没有概率知识背景的大学生概率估计的准确性更高,反应时更长,说明知识图式影响概率信息的搜索和判断。     

专家-新手型教师教学效能感和教学行为的研究

对在普通中学选取的专家教师和新手教师（各48名）的研究发现：专家型教师和新手型教师的教学效能感存在显著差异;在教学行为的各个方面及总分上,专家型教师显著优于新手型教师;无论专家还是新手型教师,个人教学效能感维度与教学行为及其各维度之间均存在较显著的相关关系;专家和新手型教师的个人教学效能感维度对教学行为具有较强的预测作用。     

不同经验教师对学生课堂行为加工的眼动研究

教师对课堂信息的知觉和加工是教师教学能力和教学专长发展的重要组成部分。以往有关课堂场景中学生行为知觉和注意的研究主要采用问卷调查、主观报告和定性分析等研究方式,不仅缺乏对学生课堂问题行为客观量化的分析,对教师如何加工课堂场景中学生行为也研究较少。本研究选取11名专家、9名经验教师和17名新手,让其观看一段时长约15秒的小学数学课堂教学视频,并记录其观看过程中的眼动信息。结果发现,教师对学生课堂典型行为的注视次数和注视次数比率多于问题行为;相对于专家和经验教师,新手对学生的典型课堂行为注视次数更多、总注视时间更长、注视比率更大;就学生的典型行为而言,新手比专家和经验教师注视的次数更多、总注视时间更长,注视的比率也更大。结论认为,教学经验会影响教师对课堂教学场景中学生行为信息的知觉,新手对突显的典型行为关注要多于问题行为,而专家和经验教师则在典型行为和问题行为上平均分配注意资源。     

Strategy Shifts and Expertise in Solving Transformation Rule Problems

The acquisition of expertise in formal problem solving has been assumed to involve either a shift from backwards to forwards inference, or a shift from unguided to guided forwards inference. In a longitudinal study, the acquisition of formal problem-solving expertise was investigated. Participants were tested as novices before undertaking controlled practice in the problem domain which involved transformation rule problems, and were finally tested as experts. The direction of inference in problem solutions was found to be inadequate to describe the strategic differences between novices and experts. Therefore, a new solution coding system was applied, based on atomic components of problem solution. Analysis of novice and expert solutions revealed no systematic strategy in the novice stage—solutions were confused and contained unproductive steps and backtracking. Several strategies were found in the expert solutions, but they did not agree with previously reported results. It was therefore proposed that the acquisition of expertise does not involve a change from one specific solution strategy to another, but rather the development of an efficient strategy, which can differ between participants.     

Analogical transfer, problem similarity, and expertise

When we encounter a new problem, we are often reminded of similar problems solved earlier and may use the solution procedure from an old problem to solve a new one. Such analogical transfer, however, has been difficult to demonstrate empirically, even within a single experimental session. This article proposes a framework for conceptualizing analogical problem solving that can account for the conflicting findings in the literature. In addition, the framework leads to two predictions concerning the transfer behavior of experts and novices. These predictions concern both positive and negative transfer and are based on the different types of features included in the problem representations of experts and novices. First, when two problems share structural features but not surface features, spontaneous positive transfer should be more likely in experts than in novices. Second, when two problems share surface but not structural features, spontaneous negative transfer should be stronger for novices than for experts. These predictions were supported by the results of three experiments involving college students solving a complex arithmetic word problem.     

The relation between problem categorization and problem solving among experts and novices

These investigations were conducted to examine the relationship between problem-solving ability and the criteria used to decide that two classical mechanics problems would be solved similarly. We began by comparing experts and novices on a similarity judgment task and found that the experts predominantly relied on the problems' deep structures in deciding on similarity of solution, although the presence of surface-feature similarity had a clear adverse effect on performance. The novices relied predominantly on surface features, but were capable of using the problems' deep structures under certain conditions. In a second experiment, we compared groups of novices, at the same level of experience, who tended to employ different types of reasoning in making similarity judgments. Compared to novices who relied predominantly on surface features, novices who made greater use of principles tended to categorize problems similarly to how experts categorized them, as well as score higher in problem solving. These results suggest that principles play a fundamental role in the organization of conceptual and procedural knowledge for good problem solvers at all levels.     

Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices

The representation of physics problems in relation to the organization of physics knowledge is investigated in experts and novices. Four experiments examine (a) the existence of problem categories as a basis for representation; (b) differences in the categories used by experts and novices; (c) differences in the knowledge associated with the categories; and (d) features in the problems that contribute to problem categorization and representation. Results from sorting tasks and protocols reveal that experts and novices begin their problem representations with specifiably different problem categories, and completion of the representations depends on the knowledge associated with the categories. For, the experts initially abstract physics principles to approach and solve a problem representation, whereas novices base their representation and approaches on the problem's literal features.     

Problem–Problem Solver Characteristics Affectingthe Calibration of Judgments

The purpose of this paper is to examine factors that affect the calibration of judgments by systematically comparing experts’ judgments to novices’ when solving a complex, real-world problem that varies in its initial characteristics. Calibration in this context refers to the proportion of times decision makers provide a range about their best estimates that includes the actual outcome. We found that experts specify a narrower range and provide more accurate best estimates than novices. But their tighter ranges are not justified by their greater accuracy: they are less likely to encompass the actual outcome than are novices. However, this effect is attenuated when solving more complex problems. Novices apparently underestimate the complexity of difficult problems, hence the accuracy of their best estimates decreases as does the width of their ranges, resulting in worse calibration. The performance of experts was not significantly different across problem solving conditions. Both groups provided asymmetrical ranges about their best estimates, which suggests they account for the effect of subproblem dependencies.     

线索提示对物理问题表征的影响

考察了复杂物理问题解决中图形线索提示和参数线索提示的作用,结果表明,在难度较大的物理问题中,单一的图形线索提示未给学生带来太大的帮助,而参数线索提示有助于学生搜索到有效算子.讨论了专家在物理问题解决过程中的特点,认为专家的优势之一在于比新手更善于发现关键的线索,能够根据关键线索找到合适的原理来完整地表征问题.     

Overconfidence in interval estimates: What does expertise buy you?

People’s 90% subjective confidence intervals typically contain the true value about 50% of the time, indicating extreme overconfidence. Previous results have been mixed regarding whether experts are as overconfident as novices. Experiment 1 examined interval estimates from information technology (IT) professionals and UC San Diego (UCSD) students about both the IT industry and UCSD. This within-subjects experiment showed that experts and novices were about equally overconfident. Experts reported intervals that had midpoints closer to the true value—which increased hit rate—and that were narrower (i.e., more informative)—which decreased hit rate. The net effect was no change in hit rate and overconfidence. Experiment 2 showed that both experts and novices mistakenly expected experts to be much less overconfident than novices, but they correctly predicted that experts would provide narrower intervals with midpoints closer to the truth. Decisions about whether to consult experts should be based on which aspects of performance are desired.     

Bothered by abstraction: the effect of expertise on knowledge transfer and subsequent novice performance.

Although experts should be well positioned to convey their superior knowledge and skill to novices, the organization of that knowledge, and particularly its level of abstraction, may make it difficult for them to do so. Using an electronic circuit-wiring task, the authors found that experts as compared with beginners used more abstract and advanced statements and fewer concrete statements when providing task instructions to novices. In a 2nd study, the authors found that beginner-instructed novices performed better than expert-instructed novices and reported fewer problems with the instructions when performing the same task. In Study 2, the authors found that although novices performed better on the target task when instructed by beginners, they did better on a different task within the same domain when instructed by experts. The evidence suggests that the abstract, advanced concepts conveyed by experts facilitated the transfer of learning between the different tasks.