Providing worked examples for learning multiple principles

Worked examples support learning. However, if they introduce easy-to-confuse concepts or principles, specific ways of providing worked examples may influence their effectiveness. Multiple worked examples can be introduced blocked (i.e., several for the same principle) or interleaved (i.e., switching between principles), and can be sequentially or simultaneously presented. Crossing these two factors provides four ways of presenting worked examples: blocked/sequential, interleaved/sequential, blocked/simultaneous, and interleaved/simultaneous. In an experiment with university students (N = 174), we investigated how these two factors influence the acquisition of procedural and conceptual knowledge about different, but closely related (thus, easy-to-confuse) stochastic principles. Additionally, we assessed the ability of students to discriminate between principles with verification tasks. Simultaneous presentation benefitted procedural knowledge whereas, interleaved presentation benefitted conceptual knowledge. No significant differences were found for verification tasks. The results suggest that it is worthwhile to adapt the presentation of the worked examples to the learning goals.     

Pilfering Eurasian jays use visual and acoustic information to locate caches

Pilfering corvids use observational spatial memory to accurately locate caches that they have seen another individual make. Accordingly, many corvid cache-protection strategies limit the transfer of visual information to potential thieves. Eurasian jays (Garrulus glandarius) employ strategies that reduce the amount of visual and auditory information that is available to competitors. Here, we test whether or not the jays recall and use both visual and auditory information when pilfering other birds’ caches. When jays had no visual or acoustic information about cache locations, the proportion of available caches that they found did not differ from the proportion expected if jays were searching at random. By contrast, after observing and listening to a conspecific caching in gravel or sand, jays located a greater proportion of caches, searched more frequently in the correct substrate type and searched in fewer empty locations to find the first cache than expected. After only listening to caching in gravel and sand, jays also found a larger proportion of caches and searched in the substrate type where they had heard caching take place more frequently than expected. These experiments demonstrate that Eurasian jays possess observational spatial memory and indicate that pilfering jays may gain information about cache location merely by listening to caching. This is the first evidence that a corvid may use recalled acoustic information to locate and pilfer caches.     

Thinking about Others versus Another: Three Reasons Judgments about Collectives and Individuals Differ

In this article, we review evidence that people are more positive in assessments of specific individuals than they are about collectives of others, even when people have essentially no information about the individual or collective they are judging. We offer three explanations for this difference. First, evaluative “attacks” on individuals are more aversive than similar attacks on collectives. Second, to encourage or smooth interaction, people sometimes “assume the best” about individuals until proven wrong. Social interaction occurs between specific individuals, so such optimism does not extend to people in general. Third, in making judgments of individuals versus collectives, people naturally focus on different types of information. For an individual, people spontaneously consider influences that operate inside an individual (e.g., one's will, one's moral conscience). But for collectives, people instead contemplate influences that operate at a social level (e.g., social influence, social norms). We explore how these three proposals help predict when judgments of individuals and collectives do or do not differ.     

The power of regression to the mean: A social norm study revisited

This research follows up on a study by Schultz et al. ( 2007 ), in which the effect of a social norm intervention on energy consumption was examined. The present studies included control groups to examine whether social norm effects would persist beyond regression to the mean. Both studies had a 2 (baseline consumption: below mean versus above mean) × 2 (message condition: no‐message control versus norm message) design . Based on baseline fruit ( Study 1 ) or unhealthy snack ( Study 2 ) consumption, students were classified as above mean or below mean for consumption. One week later, half of the students in the above‐mean and below‐mean groups received normative feedback; control groups did not. Neither study showed an effect of norm messages on behavior relative to control, providing evidence for regression to the mean as an alternative explanation. Findings highlight the importance of control groups to distinguish social norm intervention effects from mere regression to the mean.     

Effects of Comparing Contrasting Cases on Learning From Subsequent Explanations

In an experiment, prior to processing instructional explanations N = 75 students received either (a) contrasting cases plus comparison prompts, (b) contrasting cases plus provided comparisons (i.e., model answers to the comparison prompts), or (c) no preparation intervention. We found that the learners with preparation intervention learned more and with a higher degree of efficiency, perceived less extraneous load, and experienced a higher feeling of smooth automatic running while they processed the explanations than the learners without a preparation intervention. These findings suggest that comparing contrasting cases serves a focusing function. Furthermore, we found that the learners in the provided comparisons condition acquired more conceptual knowledge from the explanations than the learners in the prompted comparisons condition. This result indicates that providing high amounts of instructional guidance while learners compare contrasting cases can have an added value in comparison to providing comparison prompts concerning the resulting preparation for future learning.     

Caricatures,Myths, and White Lies

Pedagogical situations require white lies: in teaching philosophy we make decisions about what to omit, what to emphasise, and what to distort. This article considers when it is permissible to distort the historical record, arguing for a tempered respect for the historical facts. It focuses on the rationalist/empiricist distinction, which still frames most undergraduate early modern courses despite failing to capture the intellectual history of that period. It draws an analogy with Michael Strevens's view on idealisation in causal explanation to distinguish between myths and caricatures. Myths are distortions of the historical record that undermine students' understanding of the past, despite having other pedagogical benefits (being illuminative of some other period, or helping uptake of philosophical skills and methods). Caricatures are distortions that either increase or are indifferent to understanding of the past. Mythmaking, the article argues, is unjustified.     

Self-Determination,Perception of Peer Pressure,and Drinking Among College Students1

Based on self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985b), the present research tested a model that incorporated motivational orientation, extrinsic reasons for drinking, and perceptions of peer pressure as predictors of drinking among college students. In a sample of undergraduates, support was found for a path model in which global motivation predicted extrinsic reasons for drinking, which predicted perceptions of peer pressure, which in turn predicted alcohol consumption. In addition, the relation between peer pressure and drinking was stronger for those who were oriented toward feeling controlled. Support was found for a similar model in a sample of fraternity students. Results support previous research on self-determination and health.     

Breast Cancer Risk Perceptions among Relatives of Women with Uninformative Negative <Emphasis Type="Italic">BRCA1/2</Emphasis> Test Results: The Moderating Effect of the Amount of Shared Information

The most common result of BRCA1/2 mutation testing when performed in a family without a previously identified mutation is an uninformative negative test result. Women in these families may have an increased risk for breast cancer because of mutations in non-BRCA breast cancer predisposition genes, including moderate- or low-risk genes, or shared environmental factors. Genetic counselors often encourage counselees to share information with family members, however it is unclear how much information counselees share and the impact that shared information may have on accuracy of risk perception in family members. We evaluated 85 sisters and daughters of women who received uninformative negative BRCA1/2 results. We measured accuracy of risk perception using a latent variable model where accuracy was represented as the correlation between perceived risk (indicators = verbal and quantitative measures) and calculated risk (indicators = Claus and BRCAPRO). Participants who reported more information was shared with them by their sister or mother about her genetic counseling session had greater accuracy of risk perception (0.707, p?=?0.000) than those who reported little information was shared (0.326, p?=?0.003). However, counselees shared very little information; nearly 20 % of family members reported their sister or mother shared nothing with them about her genetic counseling. Family members were generally not aware of the existence of a genetic counseling summary letter. Our findings underscore the need for effective strategies that facilitate counselees to share information about their genetic counseling sessions. Such communication may help their relatives better understand their cancer risks and enhance risk appropriate cancer prevention.     

Practicing Possibilities: Parents’ Explanations of Unusual Events and Children’s Possibility Thinking

Young children tend to judge improbable events to be impossible, yet there is variability across age and across individuals. Our study examined parent–child conversations about impossible and improbable events and links between parents’ explanations about those events and children’s possibility judgments in a reasoning task. Regression analyses revealed that parents’ speculation about potential mechanisms for improbable events during a parent–child book-sharing activity predicted children’s possibility judgments for similar events in an individual task and accounted for more of the variance than children’s age. Also, parents’ skepticism regarding mechanisms for impossible events was negatively correlated with children’s judgments about the possibility of improbable events. Additionally, children’s overall causal justifications for their judgments were correlated with parents’ talk about speculative mechanisms. Results suggest the importance of conversation with parents for young children’s developing understanding of the distinction between impossible and improbable.     

Pathways of Risk and Resilience: Impact of a Family Resilience Program on Active‐Duty Military Parents

Over the past decade, studies into the impact of wartime deployment and related adversities on service members and their families have offered empirical support for systemic models of family functioning and a more nuanced understanding of the mechanisms by which stress and trauma reverberate across family and partner relationships. They have also advanced our understanding of the ways in which families may contribute to the resilience of children and parents contending with the stressors of serial deployments and parental physical and psychological injuries. This study is the latest in a series designed to further clarify the systemic functioning of military families and to explicate the role of resilient family processes in reducing symptoms of distress and poor adaptation among family members. Drawing upon the implementation of the Families Overcoming Under Stress (FOCUS) Family Resilience Program at 14 active‐duty military installations across the United States, structural equation modeling was conducted with data from 434 marine and navy active‐duty families who participated in the FOCUS program. The goal was to better understand the ways in which parental distress reverberates across military family systems and, through longitudinal path analytic modeling, determine the pathways of program impact on parental distress. The findings indicated significant cross‐influence of distress between the military and civilian parents within families, families with more distressed military parents were more likely to sustain participation in the program, and reductions in distress among both military and civilian parents were significantly mediated by improvements in resilient family processes. These results are consistent with family systemic and resilient models that support preventive interventions designed to enhance family resilient processes as an important part of comprehensive services for distressed military families.