Mental Simulation Effects on Performance: Benefits of Outcome Versus Process Simulations in Online Courses

Author:

Alghazo Runna1ORCID,Daqqa Ibtisam1ORCID,Abdelsalam Hanadi1ORCID,A.E. Pilloti Maura1ORCID,Al Mulhem Huda1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Prince Mohammad Bin Fahd University, Al Khobar, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Abstract

The present research compares the effects of mentally recreating the experience of realizing that a desirable goal had been achieved (outcome simulation exercise) with those of mentally recreating the actions that might lead to the desirable goal (process simulation exercise). It asked whether the performance benefits of process simulations over outcome simulations, which have been reported in students enrolled in face-to-face classes, would generalize to an online environment. The process simulation exercise was expected to foster attention to the antecedents of good grades, thereby improving class performance relative to the outcome simulation exercise which was intended to be merely motivational. College students from the Middle East, who were taking classes online due to the COVID-19 pandemic, participated. Type of simulation impacted students’ performance on assignments, but differently depending on the timing of the assessment. It did not influence behavioral engagement, midterm test performance, or predictions of performance before or after the test. Instead, process simulation enhanced students’ confidence in their predictions. These findings suggest that process simulation exercises may be useful learning props for activities that challenge students’ problem-solving skills (e.g., assignments) rather than engage well-practiced study habits (e.g., tests).

Publisher

FSFEI HE Don State Technical University

Subject

Cognitive Neuroscience,Experimental and Cognitive Psychology,Education

Reference50 articles.

1. Anderson, L. W., & Bloom, B. S. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman. https://eduq.info/xmlui/handle/11515/18345

2. Anderson, T. (2003). Getting the mix right again: An updated and theoretical rationale for interaction. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4(2), 9-14. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v4i2.149

3. Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the student engagement instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5), 427-445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002

4. Bloom, B. S. (1976). Human characteristics and school learning. McGraw Hill. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1977-22073-000

5. Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Cognitive domain. McKay.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3