Differential-associative processing or example elaboration: Which strategy is best for learning the definitions of related and unrelated concepts?

Abstract

Definitions of related concepts (e.g., genotype-phenotype) are prevalent in introductory classes. Consequently, it is important that educators and students know which strategy(s) work best for learning them. This study showed that a new comparative elaboration strategy, called differentialassociative processing, was better for learning definitions of related concepts than was an integrative elaborative strategy, called example elaboration. This outcome occurred even though example elaboration was administered in a naturalistic way (Experiment 1) and students spent more time in the example elaboration condition learning (Experiments 1, 2, 3), and generating pieces of information about the concepts (Experiments 2 and 3). Further, with unrelated concepts (morpheme-fluid intelligence), performance was similar regardless if students used differentialassociative processing or example elaboration (Experiment 3). Taken as a whole, these results suggest that differential-associative processing is better than example elaboration for learning definitions of related concepts and is as good as example elaboration for learning definitions of unrelated concepts.

The Influences of Pre-testing Reviews and Delays on Differential-associative Processing versus Conditions in which Students chose their Learning Strategy

“…Yet, in spite of the widespread use of these types of definitions and multiple-choice questions, only recently have researchers begun to determine which strategies might work best for learning them. One potential strategy, which is described below, is differential-associative processing (e.g., Hannon, 2012; Hannon et al, 2010). Indeed, preliminary research suggests that it is more suitable for learning the definitions of related concepts then are two types of elaboration (e.g., Hannon, 2012; Hannon et al, 2010).…”

“…One potential strategy, which is described below, is differential-associative processing (e.g., Hannon, 2012; Hannon et al, 2010). Indeed, preliminary research suggests that it is more suitable for learning the definitions of related concepts then are two types of elaboration (e.g., Hannon, 2012; Hannon et al, 2010). However, the little research that has examined differential-associative processing has not examined the influences of short delays on retention of knowledge.…”

“…Because most of these publications advocate a learning strategy (e.g., repetition, mnemonics, elaborative interrogation, underlining, retrieval rehearsal, SQ3R (i.e., survey, question, read, recite, review) integrative elaboration, or comparative elaboration) that encourages students to master the content of the to-be-learned information, there have been improvements in learning and consequently increases in knowledge (Hannon et al, 2010; see Hannon, 2012 for a detailed discussion of integrative versus comparative elaboration). Nevertheless, one emerging issue is that identifying which learning strategy works best depends on how well that strategy is being executed and the nature of the to-be-learned information (Just & Carpenter, 1988).…”

“…Differential-associative processing itself is based on premises of two well-established cognitive theories, namely the distinctiveness hypothesis (e.g., Epstein, Phillips & Johnson, 1975; Mantylă, 1986; Radvansky, 2006) and the associative strength theory (e.g., Hall, 1991; Hall, Mitchell, Graham, & Lavis, 2003). Briefly, the distinctiveness hypothesis proposes that when the to-be-learned information is learned in a distinct or unique manner this to-be-learned information is remembered better than when it is not learned distinctively; see Hannon (2012) and Hannon et al, (2010) for more on the distinctiveness hypothesis. Thus, according to the distinctiveness hypothesis, the correct answer (i.e., ambiguous stimuli) for the multiple-choice question Projective tests include: a. multiple-choice questions; b. ambiguous stimuli; c. absolute answers to ambiguous stimuli; d. questionnaires that assess personality traits will be easier to identify if it (i.e., ambiguous stimuli ) is previously encoded in a distinctive manner.…”

“…During the differential processing step a student might identify the difference projective tests assess subjective responses; objective tests include true-false, yes-no or multiple choice questions ; see Table 3 for other examples of differences. This identification of critical differences between the definitions for projective tests and objective tests makes these critical differences distinctive in the memory traces of each concept (Hannon, 2012; Hannon et al, 2010). Thus when answering questions like those in Table 2, students are more likely to remember the critical differences and are therefore less likely to be entrapped by the alternative lures in the multiple-choice questions.…”