ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2022
Support for learning under naturalistic conditions.
Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Individual differences diminish the pretest effect under productive memory conditions.Journal of experimental psychology. General · 2025Article
- Longitudinal predictors of self-derivation through memory integration-A mechanism of knowledge accumulation.Journal of experimental child psychology · 2025Article
- Ingroup sources enhance associative inference.Communications psychology · 2023Article
- Contributions of shared book reading to children's learning of new semantic facts through memory integration.Early childhood research quarterlyArticle
- Factors affecting children's direct learning and productive memory processes in the context of virtual museums.Cognitive developmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Educational opportunities occur through naturalistic everyday life experiences (e.g., reading a newspaper, listening to a podcast, or visiting a museum). Research primarily examines learning under controlled conditions, such as in a classroom or laboratory. There is relatively little known about the extent to which adults extract semantic content, beyond factual recall, from naturalistic educational experiences. In the present work, we focused on virtual museum exhibits. The materials were sourced directly from an art history museum. The naturalistic nature of this work stems from the type of content used though an important component of naturalistic learning-motivational processes-was not measured. In each of three experiments, we assessed adult learners' performance on tests of factual recall, inferential reasoning, and self-derivation through memory integration from naturalistic virtual museum exhibits. In anticipation of the potential challenge associated with learning outcomes under naturalistic conditions, we administered a yoked protocol under which participants had opportunities to engage in retrieval practice (Experiment 2a) or restudy (Experiment 2b) as explicit mechanisms of support for the three tests of learning. In all experiments, participants performed successfully on all three tests of learning; factual recall was the most accessible of the three learning outcomes. There was no difference in performance at the group level across experiments, but there was at the individual level, such that idea units generated during retrieval practice predicted learning outcomes, whereas restudy of those exact idea units did not. The current work provides novel insight into mechanisms underlying adult learning from naturalistic educational opportunities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.