The advantage of mixing examples in inductive learning: a comparison of three hypotheses

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

    Abstract

    Mixing examples of different categories (interleaving) has been shown to promote inductive learning as compared with presenting examples of the same category together (massing). In three studies, we tested whether the advantage of interleaving is exclusively due to the mixing of examples from different categories or to the temporal gap introduced between presentations. In addition, we also tested the role of working memory capacity (WMC). Results showed that the mixing of examples might be the key component that determines improved induction. WMC might also be involved in the interleaving effect: participants with high spans seemed to profit more than participants with low spans from interleaved presentations. Our findings have relevant implications for education. Practice schedules should be individually customised so society as a whole can profit from differences between learners. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)421-437
    JournalEducational psychology
    Volume37
    Issue number4
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 21 Apr 2017

    Fingerprint

    Short-Term Memory
    Learning
    learning
    Appointments and Schedules
    profit
    Education
    induction
    education
    Practice (Psychology)

    Keywords

    • learning
    • short term memory

    Cite this

    @article{9d5c75dca4e14120b9b4acb89623030e,
    title = "The advantage of mixing examples in inductive learning: a comparison of three hypotheses",
    abstract = "Mixing examples of different categories (interleaving) has been shown to promote inductive learning as compared with presenting examples of the same category together (massing). In three studies, we tested whether the advantage of interleaving is exclusively due to the mixing of examples from different categories or to the temporal gap introduced between presentations. In addition, we also tested the role of working memory capacity (WMC). Results showed that the mixing of examples might be the key component that determines improved induction. WMC might also be involved in the interleaving effect: participants with high spans seemed to profit more than participants with low spans from interleaved presentations. Our findings have relevant implications for education. Practice schedules should be individually customised so society as a whole can profit from differences between learners. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)",
    keywords = "learning, short term memory, leergedrag, korte termijn geheugen",
    author = "Guzman-Munoz, {Francisco Javier}",
    year = "2017",
    month = "4",
    day = "21",
    doi = "10.1080/01443410.2015.1127331",
    language = "English",
    volume = "37",
    pages = "421--437",
    journal = "Educational psychology",
    issn = "0144-3410",
    publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
    number = "4",

    }

    The advantage of mixing examples in inductive learning : a comparison of three hypotheses. / Guzman-Munoz, Francisco Javier.

    In: Educational psychology, Vol. 37, No. 4, 21.04.2017, p. 421-437.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - The advantage of mixing examples in inductive learning

    T2 - a comparison of three hypotheses

    AU - Guzman-Munoz, Francisco Javier

    PY - 2017/4/21

    Y1 - 2017/4/21

    N2 - Mixing examples of different categories (interleaving) has been shown to promote inductive learning as compared with presenting examples of the same category together (massing). In three studies, we tested whether the advantage of interleaving is exclusively due to the mixing of examples from different categories or to the temporal gap introduced between presentations. In addition, we also tested the role of working memory capacity (WMC). Results showed that the mixing of examples might be the key component that determines improved induction. WMC might also be involved in the interleaving effect: participants with high spans seemed to profit more than participants with low spans from interleaved presentations. Our findings have relevant implications for education. Practice schedules should be individually customised so society as a whole can profit from differences between learners. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)

    AB - Mixing examples of different categories (interleaving) has been shown to promote inductive learning as compared with presenting examples of the same category together (massing). In three studies, we tested whether the advantage of interleaving is exclusively due to the mixing of examples from different categories or to the temporal gap introduced between presentations. In addition, we also tested the role of working memory capacity (WMC). Results showed that the mixing of examples might be the key component that determines improved induction. WMC might also be involved in the interleaving effect: participants with high spans seemed to profit more than participants with low spans from interleaved presentations. Our findings have relevant implications for education. Practice schedules should be individually customised so society as a whole can profit from differences between learners. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)

    KW - learning

    KW - short term memory

    KW - leergedrag

    KW - korte termijn geheugen

    UR - http://www.mendeley.com/research/advantage-mixing-examples-inductive-learning-comparison-three-hypotheses

    U2 - 10.1080/01443410.2015.1127331

    DO - 10.1080/01443410.2015.1127331

    M3 - Article

    VL - 37

    SP - 421

    EP - 437

    JO - Educational psychology

    JF - Educational psychology

    SN - 0144-3410

    IS - 4

    ER -