Longitudinal Predictive Validity of a Learning Potential Test

The aim of this article is to provide empirical psychometric evidence of the (longitudinal) predictive validity of a learning potential measure—the Learning Potential Computerised Adaptive Test (LPCAT)—in comparison with standard static tests with school aggregate results as the criterion measure. Participants were 79 boys (mean age 12.44, SD = 0.44) and 72 girls (mean age 11.18, SD = 0.42) attending two private schools. Correlation and regression analyses were used to evaluate the predictive validity of the learning potential and standard test scores for school aggregate academic results as criterion measure. Results indicate that learning potential scores were statistically significant predictors of aggregate academic results and provided results that were comparable to those of the standard test results—providing empirical support for the use of learning potential tests in mainstream educational settings.     

Differential impact of relevant and irrelevant dimension primes on rule-based and information-integration category learning

Research has identified multiple category-learning systems with each being “tuned” for learning categories with different task demands and each governed by different neurobiological systems. Rule-based (RB) classification involves testing verbalizable rules for category membership while information-integration (II) classification requires the implicit learning of stimulus–response mappings. In the first study to directly test rule priming with RB and II category learning, we investigated the influence of the availability of information presented at the beginning of the task. Participants viewed lines that varied in length, orientation, and position on the screen, and were primed to focus on stimulus dimensions that were relevant or irrelevant to the correct classification rule. In Experiment 1, we used an RB category structure, and in Experiment 2, we used an II category structure. Accuracy and model-based analyses suggested that a focus on relevant dimensions improves RB task performance later in learning while a focus on an irrelevant dimension improves II task performance early in learning.     

Effects of aging and divided attention on episodic feeling-of-knowing accuracy

This research investigated the effect of aging on episodic feeling-of-knowing (FOK) using a divided attention (DA) paradigm in order to examine whether DA in younger adults mimics the effects of aging when decreasing either memory encoding or monitoring processes. To that end, four groups of participants were tested on the FOK task: young adults (control group), young adults under DA at encoding, young adults under DA when making FOK judgments, and older adults. Our results showed that DA at encoding in young adults mimicked the effect of aging on memory performance, and also on FOK magnitude and accuracy, supporting the memory-constraint hypothesis ( Hertzog et al., 2010). However, our results do not completely contradict the monitoring-deficit hypothesis, as DA during FOK judgments also affected FOK accuracy, but to a lesser extent than the aging effect or DA during encoding. We suggest that the age-related FOK deficit may be due to a lower level of deep encoding, leading to difficulty retrieving target-related contextual details enabling accurate prediction of subsequent recognition.     

Avoidance of overlearning characterises the spacing effect

The spacing of a fixed amount of study time across multiple sessions usually increases subsequent test performance—a finding known as the spacing effect. In the spacing experiment reported here, subjects completed multiple learning trials, and each included a study phase and a test. Once a subject achieved a perfect test, the remaining learning trials within that session comprised what is known as overlearning. The number of these overlearning trials was reduced when learning trials were spaced across multiple sessions rather than massed in a single session. In addition, the degree to which spacing reduced overlearning predicted the size of the spacing effect, which is consistent with the possibility that spacing increases subsequent recall by reducing the occurrence of overlearning. By this account, overlearning is an inefficient use of study time, and the efficacy of spacing depends at least partly on the degree to which it reduces the occurrence of overlearning.     

Receiving right/wrong feedback: Consequences for learning

Prior work suggests that receiving feedback that one's response was correct or incorrect (right/wrong feedback) does not help learners, as compared to not receiving any feedback at all (Pashler, Cepeda, Wixted, & Rohrer, 2005). In three experiments we examined the generality of this conclusion. Right/wrong feedback did not aid error correction, regardless of whether participants learned facts embedded in prose (Experiment 1) or translations of foreign vocabulary (Experiment 2). While right/wrong feedback did not improve the overall retention of correct answers (Experiments 1 and 2), it facilitated retention of low-confidence correct answers (Experiment 3). Reviewing the original materials was very useful to learners, but this benefit was similar after receiving either right/wrong feedback or no feedback (Experiments 1 and 2). Overall, right/wrong feedback conveys some information to the learner, but is not nearly as useful as being told the correct answer or having the chance to review the to-be-learned materials.     

Executive Functions in Dyslexia

This study focused on executive functions in dyslexia. A group of 43 heavily-affected young dyslexics, divided into two groups based on the results of a receptive language test, and 20 non-dyslexic controls, were tested with a Dichotic Listening Test, the Stroop Color Word Test and the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. The dyslexic subjects demonstrated significant impairment on all tasks, but with different patterns of impairment according to the subgrouping. The subgroups were equally impaired on the Dichotic Listening Test, but differed on the Stroop and the Wisconsin Tests. The data support a hypothesis suggesting executive problems in dyslexia, depending on receptive language skills.     

Math Weaknesses in Survivors of Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Compared to Healthy Children

Difficulties in math are the most frequently reported area of academic deficit in survivors of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and the most frequent academic complaint among parents of ALL survivors. However, previous studies that included measures of math skills have been limited by the use of only a single measure of math skills, most often a measure of written calculations, without any assessment of math reasoning or math application skills. Further, the nature of these math difficulties has not been adequately investigated. The purpose of this study was to examine the performance of ALL survivors using multiple measures of math skills. Performance was compared to a group of healthy controls matched for age and sex as well as to normative levels. Other measures of neuropsychological function were also administered, and the relationships between these measures and the math measures were explored. Converging evidence for math difficulties in ALL survivors compared to healthy controls and normative levels was found. While ALL survivors generally performed within the average range on measures of math skills, math performance was mostly related to memory function and dominant-hand psychomotor speed. By contrast, math performance of healthy children was mostly related to basic reading skills and visual-motor integration. These findings shed light on the nature of math difficulties in ALL survivors and have implications for intervention.     

Is focusing on unknown items while studying a beneficial long-term strategy?

The amount students learn is influenced by the decisions they make while they study. Prior research shows that when people decide what to study (and what not to), they almost universally prioritise information they do not know over information they do know. We found that focusing on unknown items was beneficial when memory was tested immediately after studying, but not when memory was tested after a delay of one or two weeks. These findings support a model in which studying unknown items causes many items to rise above a recall threshold, which results in a short-term advantage, but also leaves the items vulnerable to forgetting. Studying known items, by contrast, moves items farther above threshold, such that they remain above threshold for longer. These findings have implications for students and teachers who want to maximise long-term learning.