Pre-reading relevance instructions produce better cued recall for test questions more similar to the instructions than for questions less similar to them¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q3
Currency · newest study 2011 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Participants given specific relevance instructions recalled more on cued-recall questions with greater similarity to the relevance instructions than on questions with lesser similarity. → Matthew T. McCrudden 2011

Evidence¶

Matthew T. McCrudden 2011¶

Matthew T. McCrudden. (2011). Do specific relevance instructions promote transfer appropriate processing? Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-010-9158-x

q3 · i? · causal · r1

Randomized experiment with 52 undergraduates assigned to what-question, why-question, or control pre-reading conditions; cued recall showed the similarity advantage the abstract reports: "participants in the experimental conditions did better on questions that had greater similarity to relevance instructions".

"participants in the experimental conditions did better on questions that had greater similarity to relevance instructions than questions that had lesser similarity to relevance instructions"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Control participants recalled equal amounts of information for both question types — related
• Pre-reading relevance instructions did not change reading time on sentences targeted by the questions — related
• Participants given relevance instructions outperform participants in other conditions on the same high-similarity cued-recall questions — related
• Relevance instructions and guiding questions both improve pre-service teachers' first-order knowledge integration in a reading- and writing-based learning setting with three domain-specific texts — related