Learning from Worked-Out Examples: The Effects of Example Variability and Elicited Self-Explanations
Abstract
It was investigated to what extent example variability and the elicitation of sophisticated self-explanations foster the acquisition of transferable knowledge by learning from worked-out examples. In addition, it was asked whether the effects of these factors are moderated by the learners' levels of prior topic knowledge. To this end, we had 56 apprentices from a bank learn calculation of compound interest and real interest. They were randomly assigned to the four conditions of a 2 x 2-factorial design (factor 1: uniform vs. multiple examples; factor 2: spontaneous vs. elicited self-explanations). The learning results were measured by a post-test comprising near-transfer problems and far-transfer problems. It was found that the acquisition of transferable knowledge can be supported by eliciting self-explanations. In the case of near transfer, especially learners with low levels of prior topic knowledge profited from the elicitation procedure. On the whole, the findings underline the "causal" relevance of the quality of self-explanations for knowledge acquisition by learning from worked-out examples. The assumption that multiple examples foster transfer performance, at least when sophisticated self-explanations are elicited, was not supported. Copyright 1998 Academic Press.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
It is not well enough understood when explanations intended to produce verbal KCs should be given to or elicited from students to best enhance their learning.
“It is not well enough understood when explanations (intended to produce verbal KCs) should be given to or elicited from students to best enhance their learning (cf.Renkl et al., 1998).”
From The Knowledge‐Learning‐Instruction Framework: Bridging the Science‐Practice Chasm to Enhance Robust Student Learning (2012) · cites this paper as Renkl et al., 1998
Prompting students to self-explain each step of a worked example or each line of a text usually causes higher learning gains than having them study the material without such prompting.
“When students are given a worked example or text to study, prompting them to self-explain each step of the worked example or each line of the text usually causes higher learning gains than having them study the material without such prompting (e.g., Aleven & Koedinger, 2002;Chi, de Leeuw, Chiu, & LaVancher, 1994;Renkl, Stark, Gruber, & Mandl, 1998), but exceptions are discussed below.”
From The Knowledge‐Learning‐Instruction Framework: Bridging the Science‐Practice Chasm to Enhance Robust Student Learning (2012) · cites this paper as Renkl, Stark, Gruber, & Mandl, 1998
The self-explanation effect stems from the worked example effect and in the context of cognitive load theory was first described by Renkl et al. (1998).
“It stems from the worked example effect and in the context of cognitive load theory was first described by Renkl et al. (1998).”
From Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design: 20 Years Later (2019) · cites this paper as Renkl et al. (1998)
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 36 · Cited by 374
- Authors
- Renkl, A., Stark, R., Gruber, H., & Mandl, H.
- Affiliations
- University of Education Schwaebisch Gmuend (DE)
- Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
- Venue
- Contemporary Educational Psychology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1998-01
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 90-108
- ISSN
- 0361-476X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2140995456
- Semantic Scholar
- c5f74ba2d5e0b2a532bb4aeac51d42473e5fdd4a
- Cited by
- 374
- References
- 36
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 18
- FWCI
- 10.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Contemporary Educational Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- University of Regensburg Publication Server (University of Regensburg) (submittedVersion)
- FreiDok plus (Universitätsbibliothek Freiburg) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
- Keywords
- worked examples, self-explanation, transfer of learning, prior knowledge, compound interest, apprentices, near transfer, far transfer, mathematics learning
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review