Abstract
Solving training problems with nonspecific goals (NG; i.e., solving for all possible unknown values) often results in better transfer than solving training problems with standard goals (SG; i.e., solving for one particular unknown value). In this study, we evaluated an attentional focus explanation of the goal specificity effect. According to the attentional focus view, solving NG problems causes attention to be directed to local relations among successive problem states, whereas solving SG problems causes attention to be directed to relations between the various problem states and the goal state. Attention to the former is thought to enhance structural knowledge about the problem domain and thus promote transfer. Results supported this view because structurally different transfer problems were solved faster following NG training than following SG training. Moreover, structural knowledge representations revealed more links depicting local relations following NG training and more links to the training goal following SG training. As predicted, these effects were obtained only by domain novices.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ayres, P. L. (1993). Why goal-free problems can facilitate learning.Contemporary Educational Psychology,12, 376–381.
Bjork, R. A. (1999). Assessing our own competence: Heuristics and illusions. In D. Gopher & A. Koriat (Eds.),Attention and performance XVII: Cognitive regulation of performance. Interaction of theory and application (pp. 435–459). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Bobis, J., Sweller, J., &Cooper, M. (1994). Demands imposed on primary-school students by geometric models.Contemporary Educational Psychology,19, 108–117.
Burns, B. D., &Vollmeyer, R. (2002). Goal specificity effects on hypothesis testing in problem solving.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,55A, 241–261.
Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., &Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices.Cognitive Science,5, 121–152.
Geddes, B., &Stevenson, R. (1997). Explicit learning of a dynamic system with a non-salient pattern.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,50A, 742–765.
Goldsmith, T. E., Johnson, P. J., &Acton, W. H. (1991). Assessing structural knowledge.Journal of Educational Psychology,83, 88–96.
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., &Sweller, J. (2000). Incorporating learner experience into the design of multimedia instruction.Journal of Educational Psychology,92, 126–136.
Larkin, J. H., McDermott, J., Simon, D. P., &Simon, H. A. (1980). Expert and novice performance in solving physics problems.Science,208, 1335–1342.
Miller, C. S., Lehman, J. F., &Koedinger, K. R. (1999). Goals and learning in microworlds.Cognitive Science,23, 305–336.
Owen, E., &Sweller, J. (1985). What do students learn while solving mathematics problems?Journal of Educational Psychology,77, 272–284.
Renkl, A. (2002). Learning from worked-out examples via selfexplanations: How it can(not) be fostered. InProceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (p. 49). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Schroth, M. L. (1997). The effects of different training conditions on transfer in concept formation.Journal of General Psychology,124, 157–165.
Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1990).Pathfinder associative networks: Studies in knowledge organization. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Simon, D., &Simon, H. (1978). Individual differences in solving physics problems. In R. Siegler (Ed.),Children’s thinking: What develops? Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning.Cognitive Science,12, 257–285.
Sweller, J., &Cooper, G. A. (1985). The use of worked examples as a substitute for problem solving in learning algebra.Cognition & Instruction,2, 59–89.
Sweller, J., &Levine, M. (1982). Effects of goal specificity on means-ends analysis and learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,8, 463–474.
Sweller, J., Mawer, R. F., &Ward, M. R. (1983). Development of expertise in mathematical problem solving.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,112, 639–661.
Trumpower, D. L. (2000). Schema acquisition and solution strategy in statistics problem solving. InProceedings of the Twenty-Second Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (p. 1061). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Tuovinen, J. E., &Sweller, J. (1999). A comparison of cognitive load associated with discovery learning and worked examples.Journal of Educational Psychology,91, 334–341.
Valcke, M. (2002). Cognitive load: Updating the theory?Learning & Instruction,12, 147–154.
van Merriënboer, J. J. G., Schuurman, J. G., de Croock, M. B. M., &Paas, F. G. W. C. (2002). Redirecting learners’ attention during training: Effects on cognitive load, transfer test performance and training efficiency.Learning & Instruction,12, 11–37.
Vollmeyer, R., Burns, B. D., &Holyoak, K. J. (1996). The impact of goal specificity on strategy use and the acquisition of problem structure.Cognitive Science,20, 75–100.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Preliminary analyses of the undergraduate data were reported at the 24th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, held August 7–10, 2002, at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia. Undergraduate data were collected while D.L.T. was at the University of New Mexico.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Trumpower, D.L., Goldsmith, T.E. & Guynn, M.J. Goal specificity and knowledge acquisition in statistics problem solving: Evidence for attentional focus. Memory & Cognition 32, 1379–1388 (2004). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206328
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206328