You are here:

Dyadic executive function effects in children's collaborative hypermedia learning
ARTICLE

, , , , Behavioural Science Institute

Learning and Instruction Volume 60, Number 1, ISSN 0959-4752 Publisher: Elsevier Ltd

Abstract

The current study investigated the extent to which executive functions (EF) affect how prior knowledge predicts hypermedia learning outcomes in primary school children. Learning outcomes were: individual knowledge and transfer, and dyadic assignment quality. Eighty-seven same-sex dyads participated in a hypermedia WebQuest assignment about the heart and living a healthy lifestyle. EF measures were action control and attention control. Dyadic analyses were performed using actor-partner interdependence models with dyads distinguished by EF. Analyses showed that one's own pre-test predicted one's own and partner's post-test for both higher and lower EF dyad members. Furthermore, for dyad members with relative higher EF only, their own and partner's pre-test predicted transfer. Finally, the lower action control dyad member's pre-test and the higher attention control dyad member's pre-test predicted assignment quality. These results show the importance of EF and prior knowledge for deeper conceptual understanding in a collaborative learning setting.

Citation

Paans, C., Segers, E., Molenaar, I. & Verhoeven, L. (2019). Dyadic executive function effects in children's collaborative hypermedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 60(1), 66-74. Elsevier Ltd. Retrieved January 31, 2023 from .

This record was imported from Learning and Instruction on March 15, 2019. Learning and Instruction is a publication of Elsevier.

Full text is availabe on Science Direct: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.11.008

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Anderson, P. (2002). Assessment and development of executive function ( EF ) during childhood. Child Neuropsychology, 8(2), pp. 71-82.
  2. Baddeley, A.D. (2012). Working memory: Theories, models, and controversies. Annual Review of Psychology, 63(1), pp. 1-29. Available online: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315111261.
  3. Bannert, M., & Mengelkamp, C. (2008). Assessment of metacognitive skills by means of instruction to think aloud and reflect when prompted. Does the verbalisation method affect learning?. Metacognition and Learning, 3(1), pp. 39-58. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-007-9009-6.
  4. Bannert, M., Sonnenberg, C., Mengelkamp, C., & Pieger, E. (2015). Short- and long-term effects of students' self-directed metacognitive prompts on navigation behavior and learning performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, pp. 293-306. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.05.038.
  5. Best, J.R., Miller, P.H., & Naglieri, J.A. (2011). Relations between executive function and academic achievement from ages 5 to 17 in a large, representative national sample. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(4), pp. 327-336. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.01.007.
  6. Bjork, R. a., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2011). Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64(1) Available online: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143823.
  7. Blom, H., Segers, E., Knoors, H., Hermans, D., & Verhoeven, L. (2018). Comprehension and navigation of networked hypertexts. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(3), pp. 306-314. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12243.
  8. Cartwright, K.B. (2012). Insights from cognitive neuroscience: The importance of executive function for early reading development and education. Early Education & Development, 23(1), pp. 24-36. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2011.615025.
  9. Conway, A.R.A., Kane, M.J., & Engle, R.W. (2003). Working memory capacity and its relation to general intelligence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(12), pp. 547-552. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2003.10.005.
  10. Cook, W.L., & Kenny, D.A. (2005). The actor-partner interdependence model: A model of bidirectional effects in developmental studies. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29(2), pp. 101-109. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1080/01650250444000405.
  11. Cromley, J.G., Snyder-Hogan, L.E., & Luciw-Dubas, U.A. (2010). Cognitive activities in complex science text and diagrams. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(1), pp. 59-74. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.10.002.
  12. Crone, E.A. (2009). Executive functions in adolescence: Inferences from brain and behavior. Developmental Science, 12(6), pp. 825-830. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00918.x.
  13. Davidson, M.C., Amso, D., Anderson, L.C., & Diamond, A. (2006). Development of cognitive control and executive functions from 4 to 13 years: Evidence from manipulations of memory, inhibition, and task switching. Neuropsychologia, 44(11), pp. 2037-2078. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.02.006.
  14. DeStefano, D., & LeFevre, J.-A.A. (2007). Cognitive load in hypertext reading: A review. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), pp. 1616-1641. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2005.08.012.
  15. Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, pp. 135-168. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750.
  16. Diamond, A., Barnett, W.S., Thomas, J., & Munro, S. (2007). Preschool program improves cognitive control. Science, 318, pp. 1378-1388. Available online: https://doi.org/110.1126/science.1151148.
  17. Diamond, A., & Lee, K. (2011). Interventions shown to aid executive function development in children 4 to 12 years old. Science, 333(6045), pp. 959-964. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1204529.
  18. Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by “collaborative learning”?. Collaborative learning Cognitive and computational approaches, pp. 1-19. Oxford: Elsevier. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1.1.167.4896.
  19. Eriksen, B.A., & Eriksen, C.W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16(1), pp. 143-149.
  20. Follmer, D.J. (2017). Executive function and reading comprehension: A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychologist, pp. 1-19. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2017.1309295.
  21. Garon, N., Bryson, S.E., & Smith, I.M. (2008). Executive function in preschoolers: A review using an integrative framework. Psychological Bulletin, 134(1), pp. 31-60. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.1.31.
  22. Goldman, S.R. (2009). Explorations of relationships among learners, tasks, and learning. Learning and Instruction, 19(5), pp. 451-454. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.006.
  23. Hadwin, A.F., & Oshige, M. (2011). Self-regulation, coregulation, and socially shared regulation: Exploring perspectives of social in self-regulated learning theory. Teachers College Record, 113(2), pp. 240-264. Available online: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203839010.ch5.
  24. Ikpeze, C.H., & Boyd, F.B. (2007). Web-based inquiry learning: Facilitating thoughtful literacy with WebQuests. The Reading Teacher, 60(7), pp. 644-654.
  25. Janssen, J., Kirschner, F., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P.A., & Paas, F. (2010). Making the black box of collaborative learning transparent: Combining process-oriented and cognitive load approaches. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), pp. 139-154. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9131-x.
  26. Kalyuga, S. (2009). Knowledge elaboration: A cognitive load perspective. Learning and Instruction, 19(5), pp. 402-410. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.003.
  27. Kegel, C.A.T.T., van der Kooy-Hofland, V.A.C.C., & Bus, A.G. (2009). Improving early phoneme skills with a computer program: Differential effects of regulatory skills. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(4), pp. 549-554. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2009.07.002.
  28. Kenny, D.A., Kashy, D.A., & Cook, W.L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. New York: Guilford.
  29. King, A. (2002). Structuring peer interaction to promote high-level cognitive processing. Theory Into Practice, 41(1), pp. 33-39. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4101_6.
  30. Kintsch, W. (1994). Text comprehension, memory, and learning. American Psychologist, 49(4), pp. 294-303. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.49.4.294.
  31. Kirschner, F., Paas, F., & Kirschner, P.A. (2009). A cognitive load approach to collaborative learning: United brains for complex tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 21(1), pp. 31-42. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-008-9095-2.
  32. Kirschner, F., Paas, F., & Kirschner, P.A. (2009). Individual and group-based learning from complex cognitive tasks: Effects on retention and transfer efficiency. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), pp. 306-314. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.008.
  33. Kirschner, F., Paas, F., & Kirschner, P.A. (2011). Task complexity as a driver for collaborative learning efficiency: The collective working-memory effect. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25, pp. 615-624. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1730.
  34. Kuiper, E., Volman, M., & Terwel, J. (2005). The web as an information resource in K – 12 education: Strategies for supporting students in searching and processing information. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), pp. 285-328.
  35. Lehto, J.E., Juujärvi, P., Kooistra, L., & Pulkkinen, L. (2003). Dimensions of executive functioning: Evidence from children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 21(1), pp. 59-80. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1348/026151003321164627.
  36. van Merriënboer, J.J.G., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), pp. 147-177. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-005-3951-0.
  37. Miller, M., & Hadwin, A.F. (2015). Scripting and awareness tools for regulating collaborative learning: Changing the landscape of support in CSCL. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, pp. 573-588. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.050.
  38. Muthén, L.K., & Muthén, B.O. (n.d.). Mplus user's guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
  39. Nelson, T., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 26, pp. 125-173. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60053-5.
  40. Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2004). Cognitive load theory: Instructional implications of the interaction between information structures and cognitive architecture. Instructional Science, 32(1/2), pp. 1-8. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:TRUC.0000021806.17516.d0.
  41. Panadero, E., & Järvelä, S. (2015). Socially shared regulation of learning: A review. European Psychologist, 20(3), pp. 190-203. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000226.
  42. Pazzaglia, F., Toso, C., & Cacciamani, S. (2008). The specific involvement of verbal and visuospatial working memory in hypermedia learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(1), pp. 110-124. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00741.x.
  43. Roebers, C.M., & Feurer, E. (2016). Linking executive functions and procedural metacognition. Child Development Perspectives, 10(1), pp. 39-44. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12159.
  44. Rouet, J.-F. (2009). Managing cognitive load during document-based learning. Learning and Instruction, 19(5), pp. 445-450. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.007.
  45. Rueda, M.R., Posner, M.I., & Rothbart, M.K. (2005). The development of executive attention: Contributions to the emergence of self-regulation. Developmental Neuropsychology, 28(2), pp. 573-594. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326942dn2802_2.
  46. Rushworth, M.F.S.S., Passingham, R.E., & Nobre, a. C. (2005). Components of attentional set-switching. Experimental Psychology, 52(2), pp. 83-98. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.52.2.83.
  47. van de Sande, E., Segers, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2015). The role of executive control in young children's serious gaming behavior. Computers & Education, 82, pp. 432-441. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.12.004.
  48. Segers, E. (2017). Children's hypertext comprehension. Developmental perspectives in written language and literacy, pp. 149-164. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  49. Segers, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2009). Learning in a sheltered Internet environment: The use of WebQuests. Learning and Instruction, 19(5), pp. 423-432. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.017.
  50. Stahl, G. (2013). Transactive discourse in CSCL. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 8(2), pp. 145-147. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-013-9171-6.
  51. Winne, P.H., Hadwin, A.F., & Gress, C.L.Z. (2010). The learning kit project: Software tools for supporting and researching regulation of collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(5), pp. 787-793. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2007.09.009.
  52. Zumbach, J., & Mohraz, M. (2008). Cognitive load in hypermedia reading comprehension: Influence of text type and linearity. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), pp. 875-887. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2007.02.015.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References