Expertise reversal effects in writing-to-learn
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?
Adaptive and gradual fading out of metacognitive prompts produced the largest performance benefits, as it provided time for students to internalize metacognitive strategies, while ultimately reducing the cognitive load associated with processing now-irrelevant external prompts.
“To this point, [133] found that adaptive and gradual fading out of metacognitive prompts produced the largest performance benefits, as it provided time for students to internalize metacognitive strategies, while ultimately reducing the cognitive load associated with processing now-irrelevant external prompts (see also [134]).”
From The Metacognitive Demands and Opportunities of Generative AI (2024) · cites this paper as [133]
Cites
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68 · Cited by 27,815 · see citing works
Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.627 · Cited by 7,176 · cited 4× · see citing works
“Similarly, Deci and Ryan discussed the detrimental effects of external regulation on intrinsic motivation in their theory of self-determination (see Deci et al. 1999; Ryan and Deci 2000).”
BackgroundInfluentialThe magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity
Cowan, N. (2001) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x01003922 · Cited by 6,779 · see citing works
Cognitive Apprenticeship: Teaching the Crafts of Reading, Writing, and Mathematics
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (2018) · Knowing, Learning, and Instruction · doi:10.4324/9781315044408-14 · Cited by 3,674 · see citing works
Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems
Chi, M. (1989) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1016/0364-0213(89)90002-5 · Cited by 2,287 · see citing works
Instructional Design Theories and Models
(1983) · doi:10.4324/9780203824283 · Cited by 2,192 · see citing works
Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3801_4 · Cited by 1,927 · see citing works
Expertise Reversal Effect and Its Implications for Learner-Tailored Instruction
Kalyuga, S. (2007) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-007-9054-3 · Cited by 1,056 · cited 12× · see citing works
“In Experiment 1, we obtained empirical evidence that prompting students permanently with the same set of prompts over a longer period of time—although initially productive—in the long run, may entail negative side-effects that can theoretically be explained in terms of an expertise reversal effect ( Kalyuga 2005, 2007…”
BackgroundInfluentialEnhancing self-regulated learning by writing learning protocols
Nückles, M., Hübner, S., & Renkl, A. (2009) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.05.002 · Cited by 252 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Metacognitive Demands and Opportunities of Generative AI
Tankelevitch, L., Kewenig, V., Simkute, A., Scott, A. E., Sarkar, A., Sellen, A., & Rintel, S. (2024) · Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3613904.3642902 · Cited by 280 · see citing works
“…perspective of metacognition, when considered with the unique features of GenAI—model flexibility, generality, and originality—presents an opportunity to realize what Alan Kay proposed as a “grand collaboration” with “agents: computer processes that act as guide, as coach, and as amanuensis” [88].”
BackgroundNückles, M., Roelle, J., Glogger-Frey, I., Waldeyer, J., & Renkl, A. (2020) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-020-09541-1 · Cited by 213 · see citing works
Self-citationThe Expertise Reversal Effect is a Variant of the More General Element Interactivity Effect
Chen, O., Kalyuga, S., & Sweller, J. (2017) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-016-9359-1 · Cited by 200 · see citing works
“Nückles et al. (2010) found the expertise reversal effect in learning journal writing skills.”
BackgroundThe expertise reversal effect: cognitive load and motivational explanations
Rey, G. D., & Buchwald, F. (2011) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied · doi:10.1037/a0022243 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
Belland, B. R. (2011) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-011-9176-5 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
- Authors
- Nückles, M., Hübner, S., Dümer, S., & Renkl, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Freiburg (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Nückles, Matthias
- Venue
- Instructional Science
- Published
- 2009-08-27
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 237-258
- ISSN
- 0020-4277 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-1952
- OpenAlex
- W2024527966
- Cited by
- 107
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 16
- FWCI
- 12.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Instructional Science (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
- 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 › Education › Writing and Handwriting Education
- Keywords
- expertise reversal effect, writing to learn, journaling, metacognitive prompts, cognitive strategies, extraneous cognitive load, instructional scaffolding, learning outcomes, metacognition
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
