The effect of layout and pacing on learning from diagrams with unnecessary text

Although the presentation of extraneous (i.e., irrelevant or unnecessary) information hinders learning, it is unclear whether and how layout and pacing influence this effect. In two experiments, participants learned how the heart functions using four different layouts: a diagram presented without unnecessary text (diagram only), with unnecessary text separated from the diagram (separated) or integrated into the diagram (integrated), or with separated unnecessary text and the instruction to integrate (integration instruction). In Experiment 1, study time was self‐paced for half of the participants and system paced for the other half. There were no effects of layout and of pacing on learning, although system pacing was more effortful than self‐pacing. In Experiment 2, which was system paced and employed eye tracking, the integrated condition showed worse learning outcomes than the separated condition. Moreover, in the integrated condition, participants made more integration attempts between the unnecessary text and the diagram than in the separated condition.     

Test-potentiated learning: three independent replications,a disconfirmed hypothesis,and an unexpected boundary condition

Arnold and McDermott [(2013). Test-potentiated learning: Distinguishing between direct and indirect effects of testing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 940–945] isolated the indirect effects of testing and concluded that encoding is enhanced to a greater extent following more versus fewer practice tests, referred to as test-potentiated learning. The current research provided further evidence for test-potentiated learning and evaluated the covert retrieval hypothesis as an alternative explanation for the observed effect. Learners initially studied foreign language word pairs and then completed either one or five practice tests before restudy occurred. Results of greatest interest concern performance on test trials following restudy for items that were not correctly recalled on the test trials that preceded restudy. Results replicate Arnold and McDermott (2013) by demonstrating that more versus fewer tests potentiate learning when trial time is limited. Results also provide strong evidence against the covert retrieval hypothesis concerning why the effect occurs (i.e., it does not reflect differential covert retrieval during pre-restudy trials). In addition, outcomes indicate that the magnitude of the test-potentiated learning effect decreases as trial length increases, revealing an unexpected boundary condition to test-potentiated learning.     

Working memory capacity and the spacing effect in cued recall

Spacing repetitions typically improves memory (the spacing effect). In three cued recall experiments, we explored the relationship between working memory capacity and the spacing effect. People with higher working memory capacity are more accurate on memory tasks that require retrieval relative to people with lower working memory capacity. The experiments used different retention intervals and lags between repetitions, but were otherwise similar. Working memory capacity and spacing of repetitions both improved memory in most of conditions, but they did not interact, suggesting additive effects. The results are consistent with the ACT-R model’s predictions, and with a study-phase recognition process underpinning the spacing effect in cued recall.     

The testing effect and analogical problem-solving

Researchers generally agree that retrieval practice of previously learned material facilitates subsequent recall of same material, a phenomenon known as the testing effect. There is debate, however, about when such benefits transfer to related (though not identical) material. The current study examines the phenomenon of transfer in the domain of analogical problem-solving. In Experiments 1 and 2, learners were presented a source text describing a problem and solution to read which was subsequently either restudied or recalled. Following a short (Experiment 1) or long (Experiment 2) delay, learners were given a new target text and asked to solve a problem. The two texts shared a common structure such that the provided solution for the source text could be applied to solve the problem in the target text. In a combined analysis of both experiments, learners in the retrieval practice condition were more successful at solving the problem than those in the restudy condition. Experiment 3 explored the degree to which retrieval practice promotes cued versus spontaneous transfer by manipulating whether participants were provided with an explicit hint that the source and target texts were related. Results revealed no effect of retrieval practice.     

The Effect of Transparency on Framing Effects in Within‐Subject Designs

A long‐lasting assumption about the framing effect is that if the participants discover the purpose of the experiment in a within‐subject design, then this test transparency would trigger them to override their initial answer and make coherent choices. For this reason, researchers try to mask the connection between the two parts of the test by inserting filling questions or a time delay between the two parts of the test. In this research, we explored the extent to which these customarily used masking solutions are effective in increasing test sensitivity for the framing effect. In three experiments, we assessed the effect of masking on the tests of the attribute framing and the risky‐choice framing effects. Contradicting the general belief, our results indicate that these effects are already measurable without any masking or delay and we found no convincing evidence that the attempts to decrease task transparency provide worthwhile benefits for general tests of the effect. Beyond their practical relevance, the results question whether the test is a good measure of coherence rationality and better suit those accounts that suggest that the two parts of the framing tasks cannot be regarded as identical. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Flushtration Count Illusion: Attribute substitution tricks our interpretation of a simple visual event sequence

When faced with a difficult question, people sometimes work out an answer to a related, easier question without realizing that a substitution has taken place (e.g., Kahneman, 2011, Thinking, fast and slow. New York, Farrar, Strauss, Giroux). In two experiments, we investigated whether this attribute substitution effect can also affect the interpretation of a simple visual event sequence. We used a magic trick called the ‘Flushtration Count Illusion’, which involves a technique used by magicians to give the illusion of having seen multiple cards with identical backs, when in fact only the back of one card (the bottom card) is repeatedly shown. In Experiment 1, we demonstrated that most participants are susceptible to the illusion, even if they have the visual and analytical reasoning capacity to correctly process the sequence. In Experiment 2, we demonstrated that participants construct a biased and simplified representation of the Flushtration Count by substituting some attributes of the event sequence. We discussed of the psychological processes underlying this attribute substitution effect.