The double-edged effects of explanation prompts
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?
The larger number of adaptations might have benefitted one aspect of learning but impaired another.
“The larger number of adaptations might have benefitted one aspect of learning but impaired another: Berthold et al. (2011) found evidence that explanation prompts can be double-edged in that they increase conceptual knowledge and detailedness of explanations, while they reduce procedural knowledge and number of tasks performed.”
From Using ChatGPT is easy, using it effectively is tough? A mixed methods study on K-12 students’ perceptions, interaction patterns, and support for learning with generative AI chatbots (2025) · cites this paper as Berthold et al. (2011)
Cites
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
Memory load and the cognitive pupillary response in aging
Van Gerven, P. W. M., Paas, F., Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Schmidt, H. G. (2004) · Psychophysiology · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2003.00148.x · Cited by 292 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Bannert, M., Sonnenberg, C., Mengelkamp, C., & Pieger, E. (2015) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.05.038 · Cited by 180 · see citing works
Contemporary cognitive load theory research: The good, the bad and the ugly
Kirschner, P. A., Ayres, P., & Chandler, P. (2011) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.06.025 · Cited by 144 · see citing works
The expertise reversal effect in prompting focused processing of instructional explanations
Roelle, J., & Berthold, K. (2013) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-012-9247-0 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Self-citationKlar, M. (2025) · Smart Learning Environments · doi:10.1186/s40561-025-00385-2 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Thomann, H., & Deutscher, V. (2025) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100686 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Why do cognitive prompts hurt learning in older adults?
Kraiger, K., Cavanagh, T. M., & Willis, C. M. G. (2020) · International Journal of Training and Development · doi:10.1111/ijtd.12169 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
- Authors
- Berthold, K., Röder, H., Knörzer, D., Kessler, W., & Renkl, A.
- Affiliations
- Bielefeld University (DE)
- University of Basel (CH)
- University of Freiburg (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Berthold, Kirsten
- Venue
- Computers in Human Behavior
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2011-01
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 69-75
- ISSN
- 0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2022419953
- Cited by
- 67
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 5.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion)
- PUB – Publications at Bielefeld University (Bielefeld University) (submittedVersion)
- Publikationen an der Universität Bielefeld (Universität Bielefeld) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Keywords
- cognitive load theory, conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, online learning, tax law education, university students
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
