References of "Heitmann, Svenja"
     in
Bookmark and Share    
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailThe quizzing effect depends on hope of success and can be optimized by cognitive load-based adaptation
Heitmann, Svenja; Grund, Axel UL; Fries, Stefan et al

in Learning and Instruction (2022), 77(online first), 101526

It is well established that quizzing fosters learning. However, some gaps in the literature relating to the fit of quizzing to learner characteristics and learner perceptions during quizzing still need to ... [more ▼]

It is well established that quizzing fosters learning. However, some gaps in the literature relating to the fit of quizzing to learner characteristics and learner perceptions during quizzing still need to be addressed. The present study focuses on two of these aspects: achievement motives and perceptions of cognitive load. First, quizzing entails that learners’ performance is judged against some standard of excellence. This might make it appealing and effective for learners with high hope of success and low fear of failure in particular. Second, it is an open question whether providing quiz questions that are adapted to learners’ perceived level of cognitive load during quizzing would be beneficial. To address these questions, we randomly assigned learners to either non-adaptive quizzing, adaptive quizzing, or note-taking. We found that quizzing benefits concerning learning outcomes were moderated by hope of success. Furthermore, the adaptation via cognitive load ratings substantially increased the quizzing effect. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 37 (2 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailAdaptive Practice Quizzing in a University Lecture: A Pre-Registered Field Experiment
Heitmann, Svenja; Obergassel, Niklas; Fries, Stefan et al

in Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition (2021)

Providing quiz questions has emerged as a powerful means to support learning. However, it is still unclear whether adaptive practice quizzing will enhance beneficial effects in authentic contexts. To ... [more ▼]

Providing quiz questions has emerged as a powerful means to support learning. However, it is still unclear whether adaptive practice quizzing will enhance beneficial effects in authentic contexts. To address this question, university students (N = 188; n = 155 female) were randomly assigned to employ either adaptive practice quizzing, nonadaptive practice quizzing, or note-taking following three consecutive sessions of a standard psychology university lecture for undergraduate pre-service teachers. In the adaptive practice quizzing condition, quiz questions were adapted to learners’ expertise via cognitive demand ratings, whereas in the non-adaptive condition quiz questions followed a fixed sequence. Students in the adaptive practice quizzing condition outperformed those in the nonadaptive condition after a two-week delay, but not after a one-week delay. Exploratory mediation analyses show that performance on the quiz questions during the learning phase seems to be partly responsible for this effect. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 29 (1 UL)
See detailThe influence of achievement motives and adaptivity on practice quizzing
Heitmann, Svenja; Grund, Axel UL; Fries, Stefan et al

Speeches/Talks (2019)

Quizzing ist eine äußerst effektive Methode zur Nachbereitung von Lernepisoden. So führt das Beantworten von Quiz-Fragen aus dem Gedächtnis zu höherem Lernerfolg als unspezifisches Nachbereiten, wie ... [more ▼]

Quizzing ist eine äußerst effektive Methode zur Nachbereitung von Lernepisoden. So führt das Beantworten von Quiz-Fragen aus dem Gedächtnis zu höherem Lernerfolg als unspezifisches Nachbereiten, wie beispielsweise das erneute Durcharbeiten des Lernmaterials oder Note-Taking (sog. Testing Effect). Jedoch liegt die Vermutung nahe, dass der oftmals wahrgenommene Prüfungscharakter von Quizzing für Lernende mit einer stark ausgeprägten Furcht vor Misserfolg abträgliche Effekte haben könnte. Umgekehrt könnten Lernende mit einer stark ausgeprägten Hoffnung auf Erfolg umso stärker von Quizzing profitieren. Des Weiteren legt Forschung aus dem Bereich der Cognitive Load Theory nahe, dass sich eine Anpassung von Quizfragen an die subjektive kognitive Belastung der Lernenden förderlich auf den Lernerfolg auswirken könnte. Solchermaßen adaptives Quizzing könnte demnach effektiver sein als nicht-adaptives Quizzing. In dem vorliegenden Experiment mit N = 160 Studierenden wurde untersucht, (a) ob der förderliche Effekt von Quizzing gegenüber Note-Taking vom Leistungsmotiv (Furcht vor Misserfolg und Hoffnung auf Erfolg) der Lernenden moderiert wird und (b) ob das Verwenden von Quiz-Fragen, deren Schwierigkeit an die kognitive Belastung der Lernenden angepasst ist (adaptives Quizzing), die positiven Auswirkungen des Quizzing weiter steigert. Die Probanden wurden randomisiert einer von drei Bedingungen (adaptives Quizzing vs. non-adaptives Quizzing vs. Note-Taking) zugeteilt. Alle Probanden beantworteten zunächst Fragen zu ihrem Leistungsmotiv und arbeiteten anschließend an PCs in einer digitalen Lernumgebung, in der sie sich zunächst eine E-Lecture ansahen. Die Probanden der Quizzing Bedingungen beantworteten in der folgenden Nachbereitungsphase offene Quiz-Fragen. In der adaptiven Bedingung hing die Schwierigkeit der Fragen von der subjektiven kognitiven Belastung ab; in der nicht-adaptiven Bedingung nahm die Schwierigkeit der Fragen kontinuierlich zu. In der Kontrollbedingung Note-Taking machten sich die Probanden Notizen zur E-Lecture um die Lerninhalte nachzubereiten. Eine Woche später wurde ein Lernerfolgstest durchgeführt. Die Ergebnisse zeigten, dass der Testing Effect vom Leistungsmotiv der Lernenden abhing: je höher die Hoffnung auf Erfolg, desto höher der Testing Effect. Außerdem fanden wir, dass adaptives Quizzing zu höherem Lernerfolg als nicht-adaptives Quizzing führte. Somit scheint eine an die kognitive Belastung der Lernenden angepasste Gabe von Quiz-Fragen die Effektivität von Quizzing weiter steigen zu können, insbesondere dann, wenn Lernende daran interessiert sind, ihr Wissen zu testen. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 26 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailTesting Is More Desirable When It Is Adaptive and Still Desirable When Compared to Note-Taking
Heitmann, Svenja; Grund, Axel UL; Berthold, Kirsten et al

in FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY (2018), 9

Testing is a well-established desirable difficulty. Yet there are still some open issues regarding the benefits of testing that need to be addressed. First, the possibility to increase its benefits by ... [more ▼]

Testing is a well-established desirable difficulty. Yet there are still some open issues regarding the benefits of testing that need to be addressed. First, the possibility to increase its benefits by adapting the sequence of test questions to the learners' level of knowledge has scarcely been explored. In view of theories that emphasize the benefits of adapting learning tasks to learner knowledge, it is reasonable to assume that the common practice of providing all learners with the same test questions is not optimal. Second, it is an open question as to whether the testing effect prevails if stronger control conditions than the typical restudy condition are used. We addressed these issues in an experiment with N = 200 university students who were randomly assigned to (a) adaptive testing, (b) non-adaptive testing, or note-taking (c) without or (d) with focus guidance. In an initial study phase, all participants watched an e-lecture. Afterward, they processed its content according to their assigned conditions. One week later, all learners took a posttest. As main results, we found that adaptive testing yielded higher learning outcomes than non-adaptive testing. These benefits were mediated by the adaptive learners' higher testing performance and lower perceived cognitive demand during testing. Furthermore, we found that both testing groups outperformed the note-taking groups. Jointly, our results show that the benefits of testing can be enhanced by adapting the sequence of test questions to learners' knowledge and that testing can be more effective than note-taking. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 51 (0 UL)