Testing the model-observer similarity hypothesis with text-based worked examples

Educational Psychology

Volumn 37, Issue 2, 2017, Pages 112-127

  Hoogerheide, Vincent ^a   Loyens, Sofie M M ^a,b   Jadi, Fedora ^a   Vrins, Anna ^a   van Gog, Tamara ^a,c  

^a ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b University College Roosevelt   (Netherlands)

^c UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Example based learning; expertise; gender; model observer similarity; observational learning; worked examples

Indexed keywords

EID: 84948781586     PISSN: 01443410     EISSN: 14695820     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01443410.2015.1109609     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Arroyo, I., Woolf, B. P., Royer, J. M., & Tai, M., (2009). Affective gendered learning companion. In Proceedings of the international conference on artificial intelligence and education (pp. 41–48). Brighton:IOS Press.
2. Bandura, A., (1981). Self-referent thought:A developmental analysis of self-efficacy. In J. H., Flavell & L. D., Ross (Eds.), Cognitive social development:Frontiers and possible futures (pp. 200–239). New York, NY:Cambridge University Press.
3. Bandura, A., (1986). Social foundations of thought and action:A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall.
4. Bandura, A., (1997). Self-efficacy:The exercise of control. New York, NY:Freeman.
5. Bandura, A., (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In F., Pajares & T., Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 307–337). Greenwich, CT:Information Age Publishing.
6. Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A., (1963). Vicarious reinforcement and imitative learning. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 601–607. doi:10.1037/h0045550
7. Baylor, A. L., & Kim, Y., (2004). Pedagogical agent design:The impact of agent realism, gender, ethnicity, and instructional role. Lecture Notes in Computer Science:Intelligent Tutoring Systems, 3220, 592–603. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-30139-4_56
8. Berger, S. M., (1977). Social comparison, modeling, and perseverance. In J. M., Suls & R. L., Miller (Eds.), Social comparison processes:Theoretical and empirical perspectives (pp. 209–234). Washington, DC:Hemisphere.
9. Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. H., (1969). Interpersonal attraction. Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley.
10. Boekhout, P., van Gog, T., van de Wiel, M. W. J., Gerards-Last, D., & Geraets, J., (2010). Example-based learning:Effects of model expertise in relation to student expertise. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 557–566. doi:10.1348/000709910X497130
11. Bong, M., & Skaalvik, E. M., (2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy:How different are they really? Educational Psychology Review, 15, 1–40. doi:10.1023/A:1021302408382
12. Braaksma, M. A. H., Rijlaarsdam, G., & van den Bergh, H., (2002). Observational learning and the effects of model-observer similarity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 405–415. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.405
13. Buunk, B. P., Zurriaga, R., Gonzalez-Roma, V., & Subirats, M., (2003). Engaging in upward and downward comparisons as a determinant of relative deprivation at work:A longitudinal study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 62, 370–388. doi:10.1016/S0001-8791(02)00015-5
14. Ceci, S. J., Ginther, D. K., Kahn, S., & Williams, W. M., (2014). Women in academic science:A changing landscape. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 15, 75–141. doi:10.1177/1529100614541236
15. Contreras, J. M., Banaji, M. R., & Mitchell, J. P., (2013). Multivoxel patterns in fusiform face area differentiate faces by sex and race. PLoS ONE, 8, e69684. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0069684
16. Cooper, G., & Sweller, J., (1987). Effects of schema acquisition and rule automation on mathematical problem-solving transfer. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 347–362. doi:10.1037//0022-0663.79.4.347
17. Harter, S., (1990). Causes, correlates, and the functional role of global self-worth:A life-span perspective. In R. J., Sternberg & J., Kolligian (Eds.), Competence considered (pp. 67–97). New Haven, CT:Yale University Press.
18. Hicks, D. J., (1965). Imitation and retention of film-mediated aggressive peer and adult models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2, 97–100. doi:10.1037/h0022075
19. Hilbert, T. S., Renkl, A., Kessler, S., & Reiss, K., (2008). Learning to prove in geometry:Learning from heuristic examples and how it can be supported. Learning and Instruction, 18, 54–65. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.10.008
20. Hoogerheide, V., Loyens, S. M. M., & van Gog, T., (2014). Comparing the effects of worked examples and modeling examples on learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 80–91. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.013
21. Kim, Y., Baylor, A. L., & Reed, G., (2003). The impact of image and voice with pedagogical agents. Paper presented at the E-Learn (World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, & Higher Education), Phoenix, Arizona.
22. Kitsantas, A., Zimmerman, B. J., & Cleary, T., (2000). The role of observation and emulation in the development of athletic self-regulation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 241–250.
23. Klassen, R. M., & Usher, E. L., (2010). Self-efficacy in educational settings:Recent research and emerging directions. In T. C., Urdan & S. A., Karabenick (Eds.), The Decade ahead:Theoretical perspectives on motivation and achievement (pp. 1–33). Bingley:Emerald Group Publishing Limited.10.1108/ama
24. Kollar, I., Ufer, S., Reichersdorfer, E., Vogel, F., Fischer, F., & Reiss, K., (2014). Effects of collaboration scripts and heuristic worked examples on the acquisition of mathematical argumentation skills of teacher students with different levels of prior achievement. Learning and Instruction, 32, 22–36. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.01.003
25. Lachner, A., & Nückles, M., (2015). Bothered by abstractness or engaged by cohesion? Experts’ explanations enhance novices’ deep-learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Applied, 21, 101–115. doi:10.1037/xap0000038
26. Lee, K. M., Liao, K., & Ryu, S., (2007). Children’s responses to computer-synthesized speech in educational media:Gender consistency and gender similarity effects. Human Communication Research, 33, 310–329. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00301.x
27. Liew, T., Tan, S., & Jayothisa, C., (2013). The effects of peer-like and expert-like pedagogical agents on learners’ agent perceptions, task-related attitudes, and learning achievement. Educational Technology & Society, 16, 275–286.
28. Linek, S. B., Gerjets, P., & Scheiter, K., (2010). The speaker/gender effect:Does the speaker’s gender matter when presenting auditory text in multimedia messages? Instructional Science, 38, 503–521. doi:10.1007/s11251-009-9115-8
29. Mayer, R. E., (2014). Principles based on social cues in multimedia learning:Personalization, voice, image, and embodiment Principles. In R. E., Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 345–368). New York, NY:Cambridge University Press.
30. McLaren, B. M., Lim, S., & Koedinger, K. R., (2008). When and how often should worked examples be given to students? New results and a summary of the current state of research. In B. C., Love, K., McRae, & V. M., Sloutsky (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 2176–2181). Austin:Cognitive Science Society.
31. Moreno, R., & Flowerday, T., (2006). Students’ choice of animated pedagogical agents in science learning:A test of the similarity-attraction hypothesis on gender and ethnicity. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31, 186–207. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2005.05.002
32. Nosek, B. A., Smyth, F. L., Sriram, N., Lindner, N. M., Devos, T., Ayala, A., … Greenwald, A. G., (2009). National differences in gender-science stereotypes predict national sex differences in science and math achievement. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences of the United States of America, 106, 10593–10597. doi:10.1073/pnas.0809921106
33. Ozogul, G., Johnson, A. M., Atkinson, R. K., & Reisslein, M., (2013). Investigating the impact of pedagogical agent gender matching and learner choice on learning outcomes and perceptions. Computers & Education, 67, 36–50. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.006
34. Paas, F., (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics:A cognitive load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 429–434. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.429
35. Renkl, A., (2014). Toward an instructionally oriented theory of example-based learning. Cognitive Science, 38, 1–37. doi:10.1111/cogs.12086
36. Rodicio, H. G., (2012). Learning from multimedia presentations:The effects of graphical realism and voice gender. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 10, 885–906.
37. Rosenberg-Kima, R., Baylor, A., Plant, A., & Doerr, C., (2008). Interface agents as social models for female students:The effects of agent visual presence and appearance on female students’ attitudes and beliefs. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 2741–2756. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2008.03.017
38. Schunk, D., (1987). Peer models and children’s behavioral change. Review of Educational Research, 57, 149–174. doi:10.3102/00346543057002149
39. Schunk, D. H., & Hanson, A. R., (1985). Peer models:Influence on children’s self-efficacy and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 313–322. doi:10.1037//0022-0663.77.3.313
40. Schunk, D. H., & Hanson, A. R., (1989). Self-modeling and children’s cognitive skill learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 155–163. doi:10.1037//0022-0663.81.2.155
41. Schunk, D. H., Hanson, A. R., & Cox, P. D., (1987). Peer-model attributes and children’s achievement behaviors. Journal of Education & Psychology, 79, 54–61. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.79.1.54
42. Sonnenschein, S., & Whitehurst, G. J., (1980). The development of communication:When a bad model makes a good teacher. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 3, 371–390. doi:10.1016/0022-0965(80)90101-0
43. Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S., (2011). Cognitive load theory. New York, NY:Springer.10.1007/978-1-4419-8126-4
44. Sweller, J., & Cooper, G. A., (1985). The use of worked examples as a substitute for problem solving in learning algebra. Cognition and Instruction, 2, 59–89. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci0201_3
45. Tarmizi, R., & Sweller, J., (1988). Guidance during mathematical problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 424–436. doi:10.1037//0022-0663.80.4.424
46. van Gog, T., Kester, L., Dirkx, K., Hoogerheide, V., Boerboom, J., & Verkoeijen, P. J. L., (2015). Testing after worked example study does not enhance delayed problem-solving performance compared to restudy. Educational Psychology Review, 27, 265–289. doi:10.1007/s10648-015-9297-3
47. van Gog, T., Kester, L., & Paas, F., (2011). Effects of worked examples, example-problem, and problem-example pairs on novices’ learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 212–218. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.10.004
48. van Gog, T., & Rummel, N., (2010). Example-based learning:Integrating cognitive and social-cognitive research perspectives. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 155–174. doi:10.1007/s10648-010-9134-7
49. Williams, G. C., & Deci, E. L., (1996). Internalization of biopsychological values by medical students:A test of self-determination theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 767–779. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.4.76
50. Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A., (2002). Acquiring writing revision and self-regulatory skill through observation and emulation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 660–668. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.4.660