ArticleJournal of the experimental analysis of behavior2025
Using must-have and can-have features to improve conceptual learning.
Article in Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Differential reinforcement using matched examples and nonexamples expedites the practice needed to learn concepts.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior · 2026Article
- Using must-have and can-have features to improve conceptual learning.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Concepts can be taught by presenting examples and nonexamples and giving the learner feedback on whether they accurately identify the examples, but it is not clear how to select examples and nonexamples. Specifically, the degree to which examples and nonexamples should differ is unknown. Six experiments were conducted to compare conceptual learning for four stimulus sets (three sets of arbitrary stimuli and one set of biological stimuli) across up to three practice conditions: (a) nonexamples that were relatively similar to the examples, (b) nonexamples that were relatively dissimilar to the examples, and (c) examples only. Conceptual learning was measured before and after practice using tests with examples and nonexamples that were not used during practice. Including nonexamples in practice increased the likelihood of conceptual learning relative to including only examples. Using nonexamples that were more similar to the examples resulted in the most robust conceptual learning. Adding new but conceptually irrelevant features to the testing stimuli disrupted conceptual learning but less so when the practice included nonexamples that were more similar to the examples. The efficacy and efficiency of instruction for conceptual learning were affected by features of the stimuli used to practice and test conceptual learning.
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.