Effectiveness of Self-Generation During Learning is Dependent on Individual Differences in Need for Cognition.

Abstract

Self-generated information is better recognized and recalled than read information. This so-called generation effect has been replicated several times for different types of stimulus material, different generation tasks, and retention intervals. The present study investigated the impact of individual differences in learners' disposition to engage in effortful cognitive activities (need for cognition, NFC) on the effectiveness of selfgeneration during learning. Learners low in NFC usually avoid getting engaged in cognitively demanding activities. However, if these learners are explicitly instructed to use elaborate learning strategies such as self-generation, they should benefit more from such strategies than learners high in NFC, because self-generation stimulates cognitive processes that learners low in NFC usually tend not to engage in spontaneously. Using a classical word-generation paradigm, we not only replicated the generation effect in free and cued recall but showed that the magnitude of the generation effect increased with decreasing NFC in cued recall. Results are consistent with our assumption that learners higher in NFC engage in elaborate processing even without explicit instruction, whereas learners lower in NFC usually avoid cognitively demanding activities. These learners need cognitively demanding tasks that require them to switch from shallow to elaborate processing to improve learning. We conclude that selfgeneration is beneficial regardless of the NFC level, but our study extends the existing literature on the generation effect and on NFC by showing that self-generation can be particularly useful for balancing the learning disadvantage of students lower in NFC.

Performance Expectancies Moderate the Effectiveness of More or Less Generative Activities Over Time

“…Thus, as inquired in the beginning, it is not strange to trouble a learner who has lower PEs with hindered learning tasks. This is in line with the assumptions that desirable difficulties may be advantageous for learners with lower abilities or cognitive motivation (e.g., McDaniel et al, 2002; Schindler et al, 2019). It is important to note that these difficulties do not boost weaker learners’ performances to the level of stronger learners, but these difficulties prevent greater performance losses for weaker learners over time.…”

“…This in turn enhances learning, so desirable difficulties instigate compensatory processes. For instance, different studies implementing varying forms of desirable difficulties supported this assumption for the following abilities: lower general intelligence, lower structure building readers, and lower cognitive motivation (lower need for cognition; McDaniel et al, 2002; Brewer and Unsworth, 2012; Schindler et al, 2019).…”

Measuring Motivation for Cognitive Effort as State

“…For instance, students low in NFC are more likely to experience math anxiety, which in return, is related to poorer math performance (Maloney and Retanal, 2020 ). When it comes to reading and memorizing, learners high in NFC rely on elaborate learning strategies even in the absence of explicit instruction, whereas individuals low in NFC benefit more from these strategies than their peers high in NFC (Schindler et al, 2019 ). Recently, numerous other variables in student populations have been of particular interest in NFC research, e.g., in student teachers (Grass et al, 2018 ) or in third to ninth graders (Luong et al, 2017 ); underlining its relevance for educational psychology as well.…”

Does generation benefit learning for narrative and expository texts? A direct replication attempt

“…One contextual framework advanced by McDaniel and Butler (2010), describes the outcomes of desirable difficulties as a complex interaction of learner characteristics, type of test, learning materials, and tasks (see also Einstein et al, 1990; McDaniel & Einstein, 1989, 2005). According to this framework, learning can be improved only when difficulties stimulate unique cognitive processes that are not already elicited by the learners and when the test requirements match the processes stimulated by the generation task (Schindler et al, 2019).…”

“…According to this framework, learning can be improved only when difficulties stimulate unique cognitive processes that are not already elicited by the learners and when the test requirements match the processes stimulated by the generation task (Schindler et al, 2019).…”