Learning concepts and categories: Is spacing the "Enemy of Induction"?
Learning concepts and categories: Is spacing the "Enemy of Induction"?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02127.x
复制
发表时间：
2008-06-01
影响因子：
8.2
通讯作者：
Bjork, Robert A.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kornell, Nate;Bjork, Robert A.
归纳学习即通过观察范例来学习一个新的概念或类别不断发生，例如，当婴儿学习一个新单词或医生对x射线进行分类时。样例的间距对归纳有什么影响？与聚集相比，间隔可以增强长期回忆，但我们预计间隔会使定义概念或类别的共性变得不那么明显，从而阻碍归纳。我们要求参与者研究不同艺术家的多幅画作，其中一位艺术家的画作连续呈现（集中）或与其他艺术家的画作交错（间隔）。然后，我们通过要求参与者指出哪个研究的艺术家（实验1a和1b）或是否有任何研究的艺术家（实验2）画了一系列新画作中的每一幅来测试归纳。令人惊讶的是，诱导受益于间隔，即使聚集显然创造了流畅的学习感：参与者认为聚集比间隔更有效，即使他们自己的测试表现证明了相反的情况。
Inductive learning-that is, learning a new concept or category by observing exemplars-happens constantly, for example, when a baby learns a new word or a doctor classifies x-rays. What influence does the spacing of exemplars have on induction? Compared with massing, spacing enhances long-term recall, but we expected spacing to hamper induction by making the commonalities that define a concept or category less apparent. We asked participants to study multiple paintings by different artists, with a given artist's paintings presented consecutively (massed) or interleaved with other artists' paintings (spaced). We then tested induction by asking participants to indicate which studied artist (Experiments 1a and 1b) or whether any studied artist (Experiment 2) painted each of a series of new paintings. Surprisingly, induction profited from spacing, even though massing apparently created a sense of fluent learning: Participants rated massing as more effective than spacing, even after their own test performance had demonstrated the opposite.