1 / 20

Metacognition and cognitive load

Metacognition and cognitive load. The effect of self-explanation when learning to play chess. Anique de Bruin Erasmus University Rotterdam. Goal present studies. Initial framework:  Expertise development Deliberate practice (Ericsson et al., 1993):

kellydelgado
Download Presentation

Metacognition and cognitive load

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Metacognition and cognitive load The effect of self-explanation when learning to play chess Anique de Bruin Erasmus University Rotterdam

  2. Goal present studies • Initial framework:  Expertise development • Deliberate practice (Ericsson et al., 1993): • metacognitive activities crucial for expertise development • Rehearsal and correction of errors

  3. Metacognitive strategies • Self-explanations: • Process more deliberately • Recognizing inconsistencies • Stimulate integration new information  Enhances accuracy metacognition

  4. Metacognition in skill acquisition • To what extent do metacognitive activities foster learning in skill domains (chess)? • non-verbal nature of material • no explicit information provided • novices

  5. Self-explanations in chess • Three groups (N = 15 per group): • Observation only (O) • Predict next move (PO) • Predict and self-explain next move (PSE)

  6. Procedure • Three phases: • Basic rules • Learning phase: • Predict and self-explain • Prediction only • Observation • Test phase: play against computer

  7. Discover chess principles • Chess rules: too little information to play endgame • Chess principles necessary: • King checkmated at the edge of the board • Rook minimizes space of the King What instruction fosters development of principled understanding most?

  8. Results learning phase

  9. Self-explanations • Three categories: • Basic chess rules • Partial explanation of principles • Complete explanation of principles

  10. Results self-explanations • Median split on number of SEs: • High-explainers: >51 (mean=95.1) • Low-explainers: <51 (mean=32.4)  Compare differences in SE and chess performance between high- and low-explainers

  11. Chess rule explanations

  12. Partial principle explanations

  13. Complete principle explanations

  14. Results self-explanations • Test exercises: high-expl more checkmate than low-expl • However: No difference in time needed to self-explain

  15. Results test phase

  16. Cognitive load • From CL perspective surprising: • Despite low prior knowledge, prediction + self-explanation foster learning better principled understanding What (meta)cognitive mechanisms explain SE effect in novices?

  17. Conclusions I • More explanation of basic chess rules  better discovery of principles • Rehearsing basic rules frees up processing resources for principle discovery

  18. Conclusions II • Verbalization of self-explanations crucial: No effect in PO condition • Meaningful self-explanations • Wording of the SE instruction: Explain why the computer would make that move • No re-reads (as in text learning) possible • Verbalized (partial) discoveries of principles receive more activation in WM

  19. Future research • Examine covert self-explanation in PO condition • Test effect SE only • Manipulate rehearsal of basic chess rules to test effect on principle discovery

  20. Thank you Questions?

More Related