Publication Date
In 2025 | 0 |
Since 2024 | 0 |
Since 2021 (last 5 years) | 0 |
Since 2016 (last 10 years) | 1 |
Since 2006 (last 20 years) | 2 |
Descriptor
College Students | 3 |
Hypothesis Testing | 3 |
Visual Learning | 3 |
Cognitive Processes | 2 |
Cognitive Style | 2 |
Memory | 2 |
Regression (Statistics) | 2 |
Retention (Psychology) | 2 |
Statistical Analysis | 2 |
Aural Learning | 1 |
Coding | 1 |
More ▼ |
Author
Bruning, Roger | 1 |
Cuevas, Joshua | 1 |
Cumming, John M. | 1 |
Dawson, Bryan L. | 1 |
De Miranda, Michael A. | 1 |
Igo, L. Brent | 1 |
Kiewra, Kenneth A. | 1 |
Publication Type
Journal Articles | 3 |
Reports - Research | 3 |
Tests/Questionnaires | 1 |
Education Level
Higher Education | 3 |
Postsecondary Education | 1 |
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
Learning Style Inventory | 1 |
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Cuevas, Joshua; Dawson, Bryan L. – Theory and Research in Education, 2018
This study tested two cognitive models, learning styles and dual coding, which make contradictory predictions about how learners process and retain visual and auditory information. Learning styles-based instructional practices are common in educational environments despite a questionable research base, while the use of dual coding is less…
Descriptors: Cognitive Processes, Cognitive Style, Models, Comparative Analysis
Cumming, John M.; De Miranda, Michael A. – International Journal of Higher Education, 2012
Retroactive interference (RI) in list learning occurs when the learning of a second list of words interferes with the recall of the first learned list. Having the lists be thematically different can reduce retroactive interference within list learning; however, this study demonstrates how RI can be reduced when the lists contain similar words.…
Descriptors: Memory, Word Lists, Interference (Learning), Cognitive Processes
Igo, L. Brent; Kiewra, Kenneth A.; Bruning, Roger – Journal of Experimental Education, 2004
The extant picture-learning research does not address confusing word pairs that are not concrete (e.g., in and into). In this study, university students viewed 11 timed Web pages containing information on confusing word pairs. Each page addressed one word pair and distinguished the words with examples (example group), examples and rules (rule…
Descriptors: College Students, Web Sites, Hypothesis Testing, Visual Learning