Working Memory Capacity and Self‐Explanation Strategy Use Provide Additive Problem‐Solving Benefits

Abstract

The present study examined the impact of working memory capacity (WMC) on college students' ability to solve probability problems while using a self-explanation strategy. Participants learned to solve probability problems in one of three conditions: a backward-faded self-explanation condition, an example problem pairs self-explanation condition, or a control (no self-explanation) condition. Even when accounting for the impact of WMC, learning to problem-solve using self-explanation led to superior problem-solving performance. Conditions that prompted self-explanation during problem-solving resulted in significantly better problem-solving performance than the control condition. These findings provide insight into the influence of individual differences on problem-solving when strategies are provided, as well as information about the effectiveness of the self-explanation strategy during mathematical problem-solving.

The impact of working memory capacity on collaborative learning in elementary school students

“…When considering near transfer test performance, both member and group working memory capacity influenced the outcome of heterogeneous collaborative learning. On the one hand, member working memory capacity influenced near transfer test performance in heterogeneous collaborative learning, which is consistent with studies suggesting that learners' working memory capacity influences the learning effect (Redifer et al, 2016;Morra et al, 2019) and expands this perspective from individual learning tasks to heterogeneous collaborative learning. High-capacity members have more working memory resources to perform cognitive processing and employ more effective strategies than low-capacity members (Redifer et al, 2016).…”

“…Working memory capacity has been examined exclusively as an important learner characteristic (Oberauer et al, 2000;Wiley et al, 2014). For individual learning tasks, evidence has shown that working memory capacity influences cognitive processing and learning outcomes (Schüler et al, 2011;Redifer et al, 2016;Morra et al, 2019). Some have directly used measures of working memory capacity as part of their design to explore the role working memory capacity plays in learning (Dutke and Rinck, 2006;Sanchez and Wiley, 2009;Skuballa et al, 2012).…”

Implicit Theories, Working Memory, and Cognitive Load: Impacts on Creative Thinking

“…Generally, learners who report high mental effort during complex tasks are more likely to perform poorly (Redifer, Therriault, Lee, & Schroeder, 2016;Sweller, 1994). As with any task, during creative thinking, intrinsic cognitive load exists due to the difficulty of the task itself, but additional load (i.e., extraneous load that is not related to the task itself) could be induced by factors within and outside the person completing the task (Paas, Tuovinen, Tabbers, & Van Gerven, 2003;Sweller, 2011).…”