STUFF I CANT RETAIN

Question 1

1. What evidence regarding the human cerebellum has been found to the concept of neuroplasticity and practice? (1 point)

Answer 1

(Hutchinson et al, 2003) found that the cerebellum (movement control) is bigger in professional keyboard players, and correlates with hours of practise

Question 2

2. What’s the problem with defining expertise based on peer-review? (1 point)

Answer 2

What defines an expert may be vague or subjective (e.g. expert artist)

Perceived expertise may not mean real expertise (e.g. wine critic experiment)
Experts are often defined or decided by other experts (defined by peer-review)

Question 3

3. What criticisms have been made of Malcolm Gladwell’s 10,000 hour rule? (2 points)

Answer 3

1 This is based on the violinists completing an “AVERAGE” of 10,000 hours -there was considerable variability

2 Depends on the competition – e.g. due to lack of competition Steeve Faloon became the best in the world in only 200 hours – its more about how many you do relative to those you are competing against

Question 4

4. What is the capacity of working memory according to Miller, (1956) and according to Cowan (2001)? (1 point)

Answer 4

According to Miller – 7 items plus or minus 2
According to Cowan – only 4

Question 5

5. How does chunking improve performance in a skill? (1 point)

Answer 5

It reduces the cognitive load, as the chunks take up less working memory than if they were not chunked.

Question 6

6. What did de Groot (1948) discover about expert chess players’ thinking processes during a match? (1 point)

Answer 6

De Groot (1946/1978) found that chess experts determined the best move without an extensive search (unlike computers and novices).

Question 7

7. What are mental representations and how do better mental representations give experts their advantage? (1 point)

Answer 7

Mental representations are patterns or chunks of information (e.g. facts, rules, images, relationships) held in the long term memory
They allow large amounts of information to be processed quickly, avoiding working memory limits.

Question 8

8. Describe six strategies that could be used to foster the circumstances that encourage thinking in education, according to Willingham (2009). (3 points)

Answer 8

1. appropriate difficulty
2. Organise everything around questions - this drives curiosity
3. avoid overloading working memory (as per cognitive load theory)
4. Time the presentation of questions - not too early (before they have the necessary knowledge) and not too late (after they have been told the answer)
5. Accept and act on variation in student ability/preparation/prior knowledge.
6. Use change to regain attention.

Question 9

9. Describe the principles of story-telling (Willingham, 2009). (2 points)

Answer 9

Story-telling principles – four C’s

Causality
(joining elements with causal links instead of an unrelated list)

Conflict
(some element of struggle, between characters or situations)

Complications
(sufficient nuance to avoid boredom)

Character
(could be conceptual, abstract, or inferred)

Question 10

10. Kim (1999) manipulated level of inference required when reading some text. What did they find? (1 point)

Answer 10

im (1999) found that people rated text, which required medium-difficulty inferences to be made, as more interesting than texts, where a harder or easier level of inference was required.

Speaks to the principle of NOT TOO HARD, NOT TOO EASY cognitive load

Question 11

11. Why might it be the case that students have to learn shallow knowledge before they can grasp deep knowledge (Willingham, 2009)? (2 points)

Answer 11

The shallow knowledge (e.g. lists, definitions) may provide the chunking needed to get to grips with the deep knowledge (e.g. underlying abstract principles).

Question 12

12. Describe three strategies that may help students understand complex content. (3 points)

Answer 12

1. use an incremental approach, gradually building from easy to harder material
2. provide multiple familiar concrete applications that can be compared to help extract the underlying principles (provide examples)
3. get students to generate questions about content because this has also been found to aid understanding

Question 13

13. Describe the three condition testing effect experiment conducted by Roediger & Karpicke (2006) (methods, results, conclusions). (3 points)

Answer 13

Methods: asked participants to memorize a scientific passage by:
1. Repeated study (they read the text four times, no test; labelled SSSS on graph);
2. Single test (they read the text three times, one recall test: SSST); OR
3. Repeated test (they read the text once – then were tested on their recall three times: STTT).

Results: Then they were tested after 5 mins and after 1 week. Repeated study was best after 5 mins; but repeated testing was 50% higher than repeated study after 1 week.

Conclusions: Testing aids memory (the TESTING EFFECT)

Question 14

14. Describe the 4 condition experiment by Karpicke & Roediger (2008), comparing testing and presentation methods of learning (methods, results). (2 points)

Answer 14

Methods: compared four combinations of testing and presentation (see figure) for foreign language vocabulary (Swahili)
1, Continue to present and test items, 2. drop correct items and test others, 3. Continue presenting, no testing 4. Drop correct items, no testing

Results: Initially, all groups performed the same.
BUT the groups that involved testing were much better after 1 week (also, no advantage to dropping successfully learned words to allow more time on unlearned words).

Question 15

15. What are the limitations of the Pegword system? (1 point)

Answer 15

1. You need to put in a lot of work to remember the pegwords reliably enough.
2. it’s harder to use for abstract, hard to visualize words (“morality”) than easy to visualize words (“car”).

Question 16

16. Describe the method of remembering names (with your own example) that was demonstrated by Morris et al. (1978) to lead to 80% correct recall. (1 point)

Answer 16

Step 1: Search for an imageable substitute for the person’s name. Jo Brown = Joey (baby kangaroo) + Brown (colour).
Step 2: Select some prominent feature of the person’s face – and link that feature with the name substitute (e.g. baby kangaroo or JOEY nestled in my eyebrows, which are BROWN in colour).
This method led to 80% recall (Morris et al., 1978).

Question 17

17. Describe Shea & Morgan’s (1979) double-transfer design experiment on contextual interference (methods, results, conclusions). (3 points)

Answer 17

ehtods: When different coloured stimulus lights turned on, participants had to knock over targets with a tennis ball in a certain order.
The order depended on the colour of the stimulus light. Participants practiced either blocker or random schedules.

Results: This data shows that the blocked group learned more than the random group.

OR it might show that the random group has learned as much or more than the blocked group, but has a temporary performance deficit (e.g. due to having to continually switch task).
That is, we can’t tell how permanent the effects on performance are.

Conclusion: That is, we can’t tell how permanent the effects on performance are - (a common issue with training design study)

Can be resolved with “Transfer design”

SO then Shea & Morgan (1979) tested participants again ten minutes after the original learning trials… and RANDOM scheduling showed SIGNIFICANTLY MORE RETENTIOM

Question 18

18. What is contextual interference? (1 point)

Answer 18

the fact that practising a skill within the concept of other tasks in a practice session degrades performance

However, training to deal with contextual interference is a benefit of using a random practice schedule (rather than a blocked practice schedule, which has low contextual interference)

Question 19

19. Describe a contextual interference experiment involving a simulation of a real sport. (2 points)

Answer 19

Contextual interference in tennis:

Method: Broadbent et al. (2017) asked novice tennis players to predict where a ball would go, while watching live size video of tennis players hitting three types of tennis shot (type of shot presented as random or blocked).
Clips cut to black when the racket contacted the ball. Participants called out where they thought the ball would go (4 possible locations). For feedback, participants saw the clip again after each shot, this time showing where the ball went.

Results: The random condition led to better performance in the delayed (retention) test than blocked.

Question 20

20. What evidence suggests that trainees might be unlikely to choose a random practice schedule if given a choice? (2 points)

Answer 20

Simon & Bjork (2001) conducted an experiment in which participants LEARNED 3 KEYSTROKE PATTERNS on a number pad using either a random or blocked schedule.
They did a retention test 24 hours later.
The random group performed better BUT predicted their performance would be worse.

Question 21

21. Make a case for the generalisability of the contextual interference effect. (2 points)

Answer 21

MATH
randomly interleaving different maths problems rather than grouping them (as happens in text books) led to better performance.

PAINTINGS
that students learning the painting styles of different artists did better where the paintings of the different artists were presented in a random order (rather than grouped by artist) - in spite of the fact that students believed they had learned better in the blocked condition.

Question 22

22. Describe Bourne & Archer’s (1956) experiment on massed vs distributed practice using a pursuit rotor tracking task (methods, results, conclusions). (3 points)

Answer 22

METHOD: Bourne & Archer (1956) used a pursuit rotor tracking task and 5 different practice distributions
0 rest, vs 15s rest, vs 30s rest, vs 45s rest, vs 60s rest
- all trials were 30 seconds

RESULTS:
Distributed was better FOR ALL- (During acquisition, differences could be due to fatigue.
However, the distributed advantage remained into transfer trials (with 0s rests)

Conclusion: Distributed practise better for learning task

Question 23

23. Describe Baddeley & Longman’s (1978) experiment on massed vs distributed practice involving postmen (methods, results, conclusions). (3 points)

Answer 23

METHOD:The British Post Office introduced post codes in the 1970s, which required postmen to learn to type the codes into a key pad. Baddeley & Longman (1978) ran an experiment to determine the most effective way to schedule their practice.

Postmen were randomly assigned to 4 conditions:
2 x 2-hour sessions per day
1 x 2-hour session per day
2 x 1-hour sessions per day
1 x 1-hour session per day

RESUTLS:
The most distributed group (1 x 1-hour) learned faster, continued to improve at a faster rate, and had better skill retention after several months.

However, this group were also least satisfied with their schedule and the overall duration of their training was longer (because it was more spread out).

CONCLUSIONS:
Better for learning - but like anything, takes longer

Question 24

24. Describe the different types of variability that may affect the performance of motor skills. (1 point)

Answer 24

kills with an action component (motor skills) involve some things that stay the same but also involve some degree of variation.

SAME FACTORS:
how you hold the ball before a particular type of shot and how you follow through the action.

VARIABLE FACTORS:
1. Factors to do with the skill - such as how hard you throw it, the trajectory of the shot, and ball spin, etc.

2. External factors - such as what other players are doing, your level of stress (e.g. throwing during a high-stakes game versus throwing during training), and even your body temperature.

Question 25

25. Describe Catalano & Kleiner’s (1984) experiment investigating the effects of variable practice (methods, results, conclusions). (3 points)

Answer 25

METHOD: asked participants to predict when a moving light would arrive by moving their hand (i.e. analogous to catching a ball). Some practiced this task under constant conditions: 5, 7, 9, OR 11 mph. Other practiced under variable conditions: 5, 7, 9, AND 11 mph. RESULTS: When they were all given a transfer task that involved new speeds OUTSIDE the range of the practice speeds (1, 3, 13, and 15 mph), the variable group performed much better. CONCLUSIONS: This supported Schmidt’s variable practice proposal. (more generalisable schemas)

Question 26

26. Define near and far transfer. (1 point)

Answer 26

Near transfer is when what is being learned and what it affects are quite similar (if not virtually identical). This is easy (if not trivial). Far transfer is when there is a bigger difference (on any dimension) between what is being learned and what it affects. This is harder. (e.g. does practising driving on regular roads prepare you for a crash scenario?)

Question 27

27. Why does our understanding of expertise raise problems for the likelihood of far transfer? (1 point)

Answer 27

Evidence from expertise indicates that it is extremely domain-specific, because it is based on having a large body of highly-organised domain-specific knowledge. That is, there appears to be little far transfer between different domains of expertise The idea of far trainser, where knowledge or skills obtained in on domain or context can transfer to another, completely contradicts this ide

Question 28

28. Describe six “take home” messages from the transfer literature. (3 points)

Answer 28

1. Don't assume that transfer will occur spontaneously 2. Define clearly what types of transfer you want from your training 3. Specifically design to maximise likelihood of the types of transfer specified occurring 4. Turn FAR transfer (hard) into NEAR transfer (easier) if possible 5. If you want people to transfer a skill or some knowledge in some way, explicitly tell them this goal. This may involve persuasive communication strategies. 6. Treat transfer as a skill in itself that may need training

Question 29

29. 29. What were three aspects of skill/ knowledge transfer CONTENT that Barnett & Ceci (2002) proposed to understand the variety of outcomes in far transfer studies? (2 points)

Answer 29

1 . WHAT is the SKILL 2. HOW will change performance 3. will they be prompted? (no prompts = harder) 1. Consider specifically WHAT skill or knowledge you want people to transfer 2. Consider HOW you want the trainee’s performance to change as a result of the transfer (e.g. improved accuracy, improved speed, improved strategic approach). 3. Consider whether trainees need to spontaneously apply the transferred skill to a new domain (no prompts = very hard) – or whether it will be obvious (e.g. they’ll get prompted).

Question 30

30. Describe six aspects of skill/ knowledge transfer CONTEXT that Barnett & Ceci (2002) proposed to understand the variety of outcomes in far transfer studies. (3 points)

Answer 30

. KNOWLEGE DOMAIN (near: Psyc2010 SPSS to Psyc3020 SPSS, far: applying 3020 measurement theory to astronomy) 2. PHYSICAL CONTEXT (near: UQ lab to QUT lab) 3: TEMPORAL CONTEXT (near: same session i.e, mins later) 4. FUNCTIONAL CONTEXT (near: Course workbook to assignment) 5. SOCIAL CONTEXT (near: Individually for training and outcome) 6. MODALITY (Multi choice quiz in both training and outcome)

Question 31

31. Describe Gick & Holyoak’s (1980) experiment investigating problem solving by analogy (methods, results, conclusions). (3 points)

Answer 31

If transfer doesn’t often occur spontaneously then can it happen if we explicitly prompt people? METHODS: Gick & Holyoak (1980) asked people to solve two problems with the same underlying structure and solution, but different surface elements. Military problem: how can you attack a fortress at the intersection of mined roads without blowing everyone up? Medical problem: how can you zap a tumour with radiation without destroying the surrounding tissue? RESUTLS: Gick & Holyoak’s participants didn’t tend to notice the connection between the two problems spontaneously – but did once they were prompted that there might be one. They were essentially primed to look beyond the “surface elements” of two problems to the same “deep” structure. CONCLUSIONS: We should treat transfer itself as an acquired skill

Question 32

32. Describe one study that found far transfer effects for brain training. (1 point)

Answer 32

Useful Field of View training reduces crash involvement in older drivers by 50% (Ball et al., 2010).

Question 33

33. Describe Schmidt & Lee’s (2014) three principles of part-task practice. (2 points)

Answer 33

WHEN GOOD: If the skill involves a slow, serial task, where there is limited interaction between components, progressive part practice can be effective 2. WHEN BAD: If the task is very brief and involves a specific “programmed” movement then part training might be unhelpful and even counterproductive 3. INTERACTION: The greater the level of interaction between the parts of an skill, the less likely part-task practice will work.

Question 34

34. What is the SHARP structured feedback tool and what did Ahmed et al. (2013) find when they evaluated it? (2 points)

Answer 34

SHARP is a feedback tool that was developed for surgeons (before surgery) S set learning objectives (After surgery) H how did it go A address concerns R review learning points P plan ahead They found debriefing quality scores improved significantly after introducing the “SHARP” tool

Question 35

35. Describe the empirically-supported benefits that have been associated with actively seeking out feedback. (2 points)

Answer 35

Higher performance ratings greater goal attainment and greater learning better adaptation, socialisation, job satisfaction, and lower inclination to quit your job

Question 36

36. Describe the situations when training is likely to be an appropriate strategy for improving patient safety (according to Russ et al., 2013). (3 points)

Answer 36

1. When the goal is to familiarise users with new technologies 2. When they need to develop and test new techniques or practice techniques 3. gain experience with specialised techniques that involve sensorimotor skills” (e.g., surgical skills) 4. When used to practice or test knowledge in realistic scenarios 5. When its as good as it can be: -----When “other system components are considered first, redesigned, and addressed using human factors expertise and principles and no other system changes can possibly be made

Question 37

37. Describe the situations when training is likely to be an inappropriate strategy for improving patient safety (according to Russ et al., 2013). (3 points)

Answer 37

1. The goal is for individuals to stop using technologies, tools or devices in ‘the wrong way (The system itself could instead be changed) 2. Similarly, if it is intended to address a type of error that is occurring across multiple people” (suggests the problem is with the system not the individuals using it). 2. It is an attempt to change innate human characteristics or imperfections” (e.g. telling people to “pay more attention” or “be more careful” is unlikely to improve things) 3.Individuals have been previously trained about the safety issue(s) and the problem persists” (suggests training may not be an effective solution). 4. Human factors or system design have not be considered and TRAINNG is the ONLY intervention used

Question 38

38. What research methods can we use to understand a system and its problems (as might be used as part of a human factors system design research program)? (2 points)

Answer 38

Task analysis and cognitive task analysis heuristic evaluation of existing products stakeholder surveys

Question 39

39. What sort of methods that could be used as part of a task analysis? (2 points)

Answer 39

COMMON SENSE) For example: Review literature (maybe someone has already dissected the task – e.g. in a textbook). Interviews with task experts and other relevant stakeholders (e.g. novices, supervisors, those affected by the task outcomes). Observational studies (go and watch people doing the task for real). Get people to do simulations of the task if appropriate. (SAME AS WHAT WAS DONE TO EVALUTE PLAYGROUPS IN PAST)

Question 40

40. What is a heuristic evaluation? (1 point)

Answer 40

team of experts trained in human factors conducting a qualitative evaluation of existing products against a pre-determined set of design criteria Their goal is to identify as many design problems with the products as possible. Design criteria could include: Information layout. Appropriateness of included information. Methods of representing decision-making information. Use of decision-support systems. Effect on cognitive workload and memory.

Question 41

41. Describe five examples of design criteria that might be evaluated in a heuristic evaluation. (2 points)

Answer 41

Information layout. Appropriateness of included information. Methods of representing decision-making information. Use of decision-support systems. Effect on cognitive workload and memory.