In order to make informed instructional decisions, teachers need psychological knowledge about relational categories. We conducted two 2 × 2 experiments to examine effective designs for learning relational categories in the context of teacher education. In both experiments, a blocked compared to an interleaved example format was more beneficial for learning relational categories when generating new examples. Experiment 1 (N = 176) additionally showed that student teachers generated new examples more successfully when they had to classify rather than read examples. Moreover, Experiment 2 (N = 95) revealed that student teachers who learned with examples taken from their individual subjects rather than examples from random subjects generated new examples more successfully. A mediation analysis showed that the subject-specific task value mediated the effect on example generation. The detrimental effects of an interleaved format could be partly compensated for by learning with subject-specific examples.
BarnettS. M.CeciS. J. (2002). When and where do we apply what we learn?: A taxonomy for far transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 128(4), 612–637. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.4.612
3.
BirnbaumM. S.KornellN.BjorkE. L.BjorkR. A. (2013). Why interleaving enhances inductive learning: The roles of discrimination and retrieval. Memory & Cognition, 41(3), 392–402. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-012-0272-7
4.
BrunmairM.RichterT. (2019). Similarity matters: A meta-analysis of interleaved learning and its moderators. Psychological Bulletin, 145(11), 1029–1052. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000209
5.
CarvalhoP. F.GoldstoneR. L. (2014a). Effects of interleaved and blocked study on delayed test of category learning generalization. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 936. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00936
6.
CarvalhoP. F.GoldstoneR. L. (2014b). Putting category learning in order: Category structure and temporal arrangement affect the benefit of interleaved over blocked study. Memory & Cognition, 42(3), 481–495. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-013-0371-0
7.
CarvalhoP. F.GoldstoneR. L. (2015a). The benefits of interleaved and blocked study: Different tasks benefit from different schedules of study. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(1), 281–288. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0676-4
8.
CarvalhoP. F.GoldstoneR. L. (2015b). What you learn is more than what you see: What can sequencing effects tell us about inductive category learning?Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 505. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00505
9.
ChiM. T.WylieR. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
FaulF.ErdfelderE.BuchnerA.LangA.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/brm.41.4.1149
ForzaniF. M. (2014). Understanding “core practices” and “practice-based” teacher education: Learning from the past. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(4), 357–368. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487114533800
14.
GardnerH. (1985). The mind’s new science: A history of the cognitive revolution. Basic Books.
15.
GentnerD.KurtzK. J. (2005). Relational categories. In AhnW.-K.GoldstoneR. L.LoveB. C.MarkmanA. B.WolffP. (Eds.), APA decade of behavior series. Categorization inside and outside the laboratory: Essays in honor of Douglas L. Medin (pp. 151–175). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/11156-009
GoldwaterM. B.DonH. J.KruscheM. J.LiveseyE. J. (2018). Relational discovery in category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147(1), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000387
18.
GoldwaterM. B.SchalkL. (2016). Relational categories as a bridge between cognitive and educational research. Psychological Bulletin, 142(7), 729–757. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000043
19.
HayesA. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. The Guilford Press.
20.
HigginsE. J. (2017). The complexities of learning categories through comparisons. In Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 66, pp. 43–77). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.plm.2016.11.002
21.
JonesM.SieckW. R. (2003). Learning myopia: An adaptive recency effect in category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29(4), Article 626. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.29.4.626
22.
JungW.HummelJ. E. (2015). Making probabilistic relational categories learnable. Cognitive Science, 39(6), 1259–1291. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12199
23.
KangS. H.PashlerH. (2012). Learning painting styles: Spacing is advantageous when it promotes discriminative contrast. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26(1), 97–103. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1801
24.
KoedingerK. R.CorbettA. T.PerfettiC. (2012). The knowledge-learning-instruction framework: Bridging the science-practice chasm to enhance robust student learning. Cognitive Science, 36(5), 757–798. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2012.01245.x
MedinD. L.RipsL. J. (2005). Concepts and categories: Memory, meaning, and metaphysics. In HolyoakK. J.MorrisonR. G. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (Vol. 137, pp. 37–72). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199734689.013.0011
MielickiM. K.WileyJ. (2022). Exploring the necessary conditions for observing interleaved practice benefits in math learning. Learning and Instruction, Article 101583, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2022.101583
30.
MorrisA. K.HiebertJ. (2017). Effects of teacher preparation courses: Do graduates use what they learned to plan mathematics lessons?American Educational Research Journal, 54(3), 524–567. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831217695217
31.
PerkinsD. N.SalomonG. (1992). Transfer of learning. In International Encyclopedia of Education, Second Edition. Pergamon Press.
32.
PintrichP. R.SmithD. A. F.GarciaT.McKeachieW. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). University of Michigan.
33.
RoedigerH. L.IIIPycM. A. (2012). Inexpensive techniques to improve education: Applying cognitive psychology to enhance educational practice. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1(4), 242–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2012.09.002
SimC. H.GanF. F.ChangT. C. (2005). Outlier labeling with boxplot procedures. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 100(470), 642–652. https://doi.org/10.1198/016214504000001466
36.
SmithP. L.RaganT. J. (2005). Instructional design, 3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons.
37.
Steininger, T. M., Wittwer, J., & Voss, T. (2022). Classifying examples is more effective for learning relational categories than reading or generating examples. Instructional Science, 50, 771–788. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-022-09584-7
38.
WahlheimC. N.DunloskyJ.JacobyL. L. (2011). Spacing enhances the learning of natural concepts: An investigation of mechanisms, metacognition, and aging. Memory & Cognition, 39(5), 750–763. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-010-0063-y
