When Is It Better to Learn Together? Insights from Research on Collaborative Learning
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?
Group work is well-suited for preparatory problem solving because it affords students opportunities to cue each other's prior knowledge, build on complementary expertise, and use increased memory and problem-solving resources to detect and correct errors when developing multiple RSMs.
“Group work , despite posing additional cognitive costs in coordinating problem-solving strategies from one's partner, is rather well-suited for preparatory problem solving. This is because it affords students the opportunity to cue each other's prior knowledge, build on the complementary expertise of a group member, and use the increased memory and problem-solving resources to detect and”
From When Problem Solving Followed by Instruction Works: Evidence for Productive Failure (2021) · cites this paper as Nokes-Malach et al., 2015
Cites
An Educational Psychology Success Story: Social Interdependence Theory and Cooperative Learning
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x09339057 · Cited by 2,721 · cited 4× · see citing works
“Their social interdependence theory of cooperative learning focuses on individuals promoting the achievement of joint goals with others in their group (Johnson and Johnson 1989, 2009).”
BackgroundInfluentialThe Construction of Shared Knowledge in Collaborative Problem Solving.
Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S. D. (1995) · Computer Supported Collaborative Learning · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-85098-1_5 · Cited by 2,274 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The construction of common ground is the act of determining what knowledge is shared across collaborators (Beers et al. 2005; Roschelle and Teasley 1995).”
BackgroundSocial loafing: a meta-analytic review and theoretical integration.
Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.65.4.681 · Cited by 2,196 · see citing works
The power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice
Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00012.x · Cited by 2,037 · see citing works
Collective memory: Collaborative and individual processes in remembering.
Weldon, M. S., & Bellinger, K. D. (1997) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition · doi:10.1037/0278-7393.23.5.1160 · Cited by 498 · cited 4× · see citing works
“…(Andersson and Rönnberg 1995), experiment 1; stories (Andersson and Rönnberg 1995 ), experiment 1; problem scenarios (Meade et al. 2009); pictures (Weldon and Bellinger 1997); and videos (Andersson and Rönnberg 1995), experiment 2), category learning (e.g., Voiklis and Corter 2012), and video…”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialLaughlin, P. R., Hatch, E. C., Silver, J. S., & Boh, L. (2006) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.644 · Cited by 390 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…that has examined effects of dyad or group performance compared to individual performance on a single task such as puzzle problem solving (e.g., Laughlin et al. 2006), brainstorming (e.g., Paulus and Yang 2000), and scientific discovery (e.g., Okada and Simon 1997), among others (see Kerr and…”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
When Problem Solving Followed by Instruction Works: Evidence for Productive Failure
Sinha, T., & Kapur, M. (2021) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543211019105 · Cited by 212 · see citing works
“This is because it affords students the opportunity to cue each other’s prior knowledge, build on the complementary expertise of a group member, and use the increased memory and problem-solving resources to detect and correct errors when developing multiple RSMs (Nokes-Malach et al., 2015).”
The Role of Robotics Teams’ Collaboration Quality on Team Performance in a Robotics Tournament
Menekse, M., Higashi, R., Schunn, C. D., & Baehr, E. (2017) · Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/jee.20178 · Cited by 80 · see citing works
Collaborative writing at work: peer feedback in a blended learning environment
López-Pellisa, T., Rotger, N., & Rodríguez-Gallego, F. (2021) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-020-10312-2 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Teaching to write collaborative argumentative syntheses in higher education
Granado-Peinado, M., Mateos, M., Martín, E., & Cuevas, I. (2019) · Reading and Writing · doi:10.1007/s11145-019-09939-6 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Exploring the use of regular reflections in student collaboration: a case study in higher education
Schürmann, V., Bodemer, D., & Marquardt, N. (2025) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2025.1526487 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
- Authors
- Nokes-Malach, T. J., Richey, J. E., & Gadgil, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Pittsburgh (US)
- ORCID
- Richey, J. Elizabeth
- Venue
- Educational Psychology Review
- Published
- 2015-06-06
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 645-656
- ISSN
- 1040-726X (ISSN-L)
- 1573-336X
- OpenAlex
- W1899937316
- Cited by
- 308
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 28 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 52 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 21.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Educational Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Johnson and Johnson
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Social Sciences › Education › Problem and Project Based Learning
- Keywords
- cooperative learning, group learning, learning outcomes, social psychology of learning, cognitive psychology of learning, instructional design
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
