Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The influence of the conceptual structure of external representations when relearning history content

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Educational technology research and development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

How does conceptual structure of external representations contribute to learning? This investigation considered the influence of generative concept sorting and of external structure information moderated by perceived difficulty. In Study 1, undergraduate students completed a perceived difficulty survey and comprehension pretest, then a sorting task, and finally a comprehension posttest. Results showed that both perceived difficulty and comprehension pretest significantly predicted comprehension posttest performance. Learners who perceived that history is difficult attained significantly greater posttest scores and had more expert-like networks. In Study 2, participants completed the same perceived difficulty survey and comprehension pretest, then were randomly assigned to read a text with different external structure support, either an expert network or an equivalent outline of the text, and finally all completed the same sorting task posttest and a comprehension posttest. In Study 2, there was no significant difference for external structure support on posttest comprehension (outline = network), but reading with an outline led to a linear conceptual structure that matched the topic order of the text while reading with a network led to a more expert-like relational structure. As in Study 1, comprehension pretest and perceived difficulty significantly predicted posttest performance, but in contrast to Study 1, learners who perceived that history is easy attained significantly greater posttest scores. Practitioners should consider using generative sorting tasks when relearning history content. For theory building purposes, post-reading mental representations matched the form of the external representation used when reading, thus the conceptual structure of the external representation should be considered in future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

Data available on request from the authors. The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, RBC, upon reasonable request.

References

  • Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage Publications Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Albers, M. J. (2017). Introduction to quantitative data analysis in the behavioral and social sciences. Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Altmann, G. T. M. (2004). Language-mediated eye movements in the absence of a visual world: The ‘blank screen paradigm.’ Cognition, 93, 79–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balluerka, N. (1995). The influence of instructions, outlines, and illustrations on the comprehension and recall of scientific texts. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20, 369–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. (1960). The Process of Education. The President and Fellows of Harvard College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, D. (1993). Images are both depictive and descriptive. In B. Roskos-Ewoldsen, M. J. Intons-Peterson, & R. E. Anderson (Eds.), Advances in Psychology. Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clariana, R. B. (2010a). Deriving individual and group knowledge structure from network diagrams and from essays. In D. Ifenthaler, P. Pirnay-Dummer, & N. Seel (Eds.), Computer-Based Diagnostics and Systematic Analysis of Knowledge (pp. 117–130). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Clariana, R. B. (2010). Multi-decision approaches for eliciting knowledge structure. In D. Ifenthaler, P. Pirnay-Dummer, & N. M. Seel (Eds.), Computer-Based Diagnostics and Systematic Analysis of Knowledge (pp. 41–59). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Clariana, R. B., & Marker, A. (2007). Generating topic headings during reading of screen-based text facilitates learning of structural knowledge and impairs learning of lower-level knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 37(2), 173–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clariana, R. B., & Park, E. (2021). Item-level monitoring, response style stability, and the hard-easy effect. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69(2), 693–712. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-09981-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clariana, R. B., Wolfe, M. B., & Kim, K. (2014). The influence of narrative and expository text lesson text structures on knowledge structures: Alternate measures of knowledge structure. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(4), 601–616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-014-9348-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clariana, R. B., Tang, H., & Chen, X. (2022). Corroborating a sorting task measure of individual and of local collective knowledge structure. Educational Technology Research and Development. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10123-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colliot, T., & Jamet, É. (2018). How does adding versus self-generating a hierarchical outline while learning from a multimedia document influence students’ performances? Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 354–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Confrey, J., Maloney, A., & Corley, A. K. (2014). Learning trajectories: A framework for connecting standards with curriculum. ZDM, 46, 719–733. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0598-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, L. K., & Mayer, R. E. (1988). Teaching readers about the structure of scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 448–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dan, Y., Wei, T., Zhao, W., & Tianjin, T. (2013). Evaluation of history interest inventory: Development and evaluation of a history interest inventory for Chinese K-12 students. Journal of International Social Studies, 3(2), 71–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L. (1992). The relation of interest to the motivation of behavior: A self-determination theory perspective. In A. Renninger, S. Hidi, & A. Krapp (Eds.), The Role of Interest in Learning and Development (pp. 43–70). Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delorme, A., Poncet, M., & Fabre-Thorpe, M. (2018). Briefly flashed scenes can be stored in long-term memory. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 12(688), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2018.00688

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demetriadis, S., de Jong, T., Dettori, G., Fischer, F., Giannetti, T., & van der Meij, J. (2004). An introduction to the concepts and methods for analyzing the interaction between learner’s internal and external representations in multimedia environments. In S. Demetriadis (ed.), Interaction between learner’s internal and external representations in multimedia environment: a state-of-the-art (pp. 10–55). https://telearn.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00190213

  • Eitel, A., Scheiter, K., Schüler, A., Nyström, M., & Holmqvist, K. (2013). How a picture facilitates the process of learning from text: Evidence for scaffolding. Learning and Instruction, 28, 48–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fesel, S. S., Segers, E., Verhoeven, L., & Clariana, R. (2015). Quality of children’s knowledge representations in digital text comprehension: Evidence from Pathfinder networks. Computers in Human Behavior, 47, 135–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Follmer, D. J., Fang, S.-Y., Clariana, R. B., Meyer, B. J. F., & Li, P. (2018). What predicts adult readers’ understanding of STEM texts? Reading and Writing, 31, 185–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gernsbacher, M. A. (1990). Language comprehension as structure building. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Grabowski, B. L. (2003). Generative learning contributions to the design of instruction and learning. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Association for Educational Communications and Technology Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (2nd ed., pp. 719–743). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayat, A. A., Shateri, K., Amini, M., et al. (2020). Relationships between academic self-efficacy, learning-related emotions, and metacognitive learning strategies with academic performance in medical students: A structural equation model. BMC Medical Education, 20, 76. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-01995-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herl, H. E., Baker, E. L., & Niemi, D. (1996). Construct validation of an approach to modeling cognitive structure of U.S. History knowledge. The Journal of Educational Research, 89(4), 206–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1996.9941206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hidi, S. (1990). Interest and its contribution as a mental resource for learning. Review of Educational Research, 60, 549–572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hidi, S., & McLaren, J. (1990). The effect of topic and theme interestingness on the production of school expositions. In H. Mandl, E. De Corte, N. Bennett, & H. F. Friedrich (Eds.), Learning and instruction: European research in an international context. Pergamon: Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoover, M. A., & Richardson, D. C. (2008). When facts go down the rabbit hole: Contrasting features and objecthood as indexes to memory. Cognition, 108, 533–542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iacobucci, D., Posavac, S. S., Kardes, F. R., Schneider, M. J., & Popovich, D. L. (2015). The median split: Robust, refined, and revived. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25(4), 690–704. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2015.06.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ifenthaler, D. (2011). Identifying cross-domain distinguishing features of cognitive structure. Education Technology Research and Development, 59, 817–840. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-011-9207-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ismail, M., Aziz, F. H., Fajil, M.A.-B., Ismail, M. F., & Shah, A.P.-M. (2017). The relationship between self -efficacy and GPA grade scores of students. International Journal of Applied Psychology, 7(2), 44–47. https://doi.org/10.5923/j.ijap.20170702.03

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H., Reeves, T. C., Hong, N., Harvey, D., & Peers, K. (1997). Concept mapping as cognitive learning and assessment tools. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 8(3), 289–308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalyuga, S. (2007). Expertise reversal effect and its implications for learner-tailored instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 19(4), 509–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kemp, C., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2008). The discovery of structural form. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(31), 10687–10692. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0802631105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiewra, K. A., Kauffman, D. F., Robinson, D. H., Dubois, N. F., & Staley, R. K. (1999). Supplementing floundering text with adjunct displays. Instructional Science, 27, 373–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, K., & Clariana, R. B. (2019). Applications of Pathfinder network scaling for identifying an optimal use of first language for second language science reading comprehension. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67, 85–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9607-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirsh, D. (2010). Thinking with external representations. Artificial Intelligence & Society, 25, 441–454. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-010-0272-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozma, R. A. (2020). Use of multiple representations by experts and novices. In P. van Meter, A. List, D. Lombardi, & P. Kendeou (Eds.), Handbook of learning from multiple representations and perspectives (pp. 33–47). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kozma, R. B., & Russell, J. (1997). Multimedia and understanding: Expert and novice responses to different representations of chemical phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(9), 949–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11, 65–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M. K., & Clariana, R. B. (2022). The influence of external concept structures on an individual’s knowledge structures. Educational Technology Research and Development, 70, 1657–1674. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10144-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, J. (2003). U.S. and Chinese cultural beliefs about learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 258–267. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahlow, N., Hahnel, C., Kroehne, U., Artelt, C., Goldhammer, F., & Schoor, C. (2022). The role of domain-related epistemic beliefs for mastering cognitive requirements in multiple document comprehension. Learning and Individual Differences, 94, 102116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mak, M. H. C., & Twitchell, H. (2020). Evidence for preferential attachment: Words that are more well connected in semantic networks are better at acquiring new links in paired-associate learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, Online First. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-020-01773-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E., Cook, L. K., & Dyck, J. L. (1983). Techniques that help readers build mental models from scientific text: Definitions pretraining and signaling. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(6), 1089–1105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merriman, K. A., Clariana, R. B., & Bernardi, R. J. (2012). Goal orientation and feedback congruence: Effects on discretionary effort and achievement. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(11), 2776–2796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nesbit, J., Larios, H., & Adesope, O. (2007). How students read concept maps: A study of eye movements. In C. Montgomerie & J. Seale (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2007--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 3961–3970). Vancouver, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/25950/.

  • Nicoara, S.-M., Szamoskozi, S.-E., Mitrea, D.-A., & Leucuta, D.-C. (2020). Concept mapping, an effective tool for long-term memorization of anatomy—A quasi-experimental research carried out among 1st Year general medicine students. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, 10, 530–543. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe10010038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nuutila, K., Tapola, A., Tuominen, H., Kupiainen, S., Pásztor, A., & Niemivirta, M. (2020). Reciprocal predictions between interest, self-efficacy, and performance during a task. Frontiers in Education. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.00036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, A. M., Dansereau, D. F., & Hall, R. H. (2002). Knowledge maps as scaffolds for cognitive processing. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 71–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Outline of Chinese Modern History. (2013). Writing team of the Outline of Chinese Modern History (in Chinese). Higher Education Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 45(3), 255–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patall, E. A., Hooper, S., Vasquez, A. C., Pituch, K. A., & Steingut, R. R. (2018). Science class is too hard: Perceived difficulty, disengagement, and the role of teacher autonomy support from a daily diary perspective. Learning and Instruction, 58, 220–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, J., & Kosslyn, S. M. (2015). The heterogeneity of mental representation: Ending the imagery debate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(33), 10089–10092. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1504933112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potelle, H., & Rouet, J. F. (2003). Effects of content representation and readers’ prior knowledge on the comprehension of hypertext. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58, 327–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ribeiro, N. F., & Yarnal, C. M. (2010). The Perceived Difficulty Assessment Questionnaire (PDAQ): methodology and applications for leisure educators and practitioners. Schole: A Journal of Leisure Studies and Recreation Education, 25, 111–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, D. H. (1997). Graphic organizers as aids to text learning. Reading Research and Instruction, 37(2), 85–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, D. H., & Kiewra, K. A. (1995). Visual argument: Graphic organizers are superior to outlines in improving learning from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(3), 455–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, D. H., Corliss, S. B., Bush, A. M., Bera, S. J., & Tomberlin, T. (2003). Optimal presentation of graphic organizers and text: A case for large bites? Educational Technology Research and Development, 51, 25–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504542

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roelle, J., & Nückles, M. (2019). Generative learning versus retrieval practice in learning from text: The cohesion and elaboration of the text matters. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(8), 1341–1361. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothkopf, E. Z. (1971). Incidental memory for location of information in text. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 10, 608–613. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(71)80066-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Royce, J. R. (1978). Three ways of knowing and the scientific world-view. Methodology and Science, 11, 146–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarwar, G. S., & Trumpower, D. L. (2015). Effects of conceptual, procedural, and declarative reflection on students’ structural knowledge in physics. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63, 185–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9368-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saura, J. (2018). Is a single item enough to measure a construct? MeasuringU Newsletter, https://measuringu.com/single-multi-items/ Accessed 14 March

  • Schiefele, U. (1991). Interest, learning, and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 299–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiefele, U. (1992). Topic interest and levels of text comprehension. In A. Renninger, S. Hidi, & A. Krapp (Eds.), The Role of Interest in Learning and Development (pp. 151–182). Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schnotz, W., & Kürschner, C. (2008). External and internal representations in the acquisition and use of knowledge: visualization effects on mental model construction. Instructional Science, 36(3), 175–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schüler, A. (2020). Cognitive processes underlying learning from multiple representations. In P. van Meter, A. List, D. Lombardi, & P. Kendeou (Eds.), Handbook of learning from multiple representations and perspectives (pp. 48–61). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schulman, A. I. (1973). Recognition memory and the recall of spatial location. Memory & Cognition, 1(3), 256–260. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03198106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schvaneveldt, R. W., Durso, F. T., & Dearholt, D. W. (1989). Network structures in proximity data. In G. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (pp. 249–284). Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schvaneveldt, R. W. (2020). Pathfinder [Computer software]. Retrieved from https://research-collective.com/PFWeb/.

  • Schwartz, S. (2022). Map: Where Critical Race Theory is under attack. Education Week, Updated. https://www.edweek.org/policy-politics/map-where-critical-race-theory-is-under-attack/2021/06 Accessed 18 May 2022

  • Sheppard, M. (2022). Emotional rules in two history classrooms. The Journal of Social Studies Research, Online First,. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssr.2022.04.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siew, C. S. Q., Wulff, D. U., Beckage, N. M., & Kenett, Y. N. (2019). Cognitive network science: a review of research on cognition through the lens of network representations processes and dynamics cognitive network science: A new frontier. Complexity. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/2108423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spivey, M. J., & Geng, J. (2001). Oculomotor mechanisms activated by imagery and memory: Eye movements to absent objects. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 65, 235–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stull, A. T., & Mayer, R. E. (2007). Learning by doing versus learning by viewing: Three experimental comparisons of learner-generated versus author-provided graphic organizers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(4), 808–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, H., & Clariana, R. B. (2017). Leveraging a sorting task as a measure of knowledge structure in bilingual settings. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 22, 23–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trumpower, D. L., & Sarwar, G. S. (2010). Effectiveness of structural feedback provided by Pathfinder networks. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 43(1), 7–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tseng, H.-C., Chen, B., Chang, T.-H., & Sung, Y.-T. (2019). Integrating LSA-based hierarchical conceptual space and machine learning methods for leveling the readability of domain-specific texts. Natural Language Engineering, 25, 331–361. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1351324919000093

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Dijk, T. A. (1980). The concept of macrostructure. In T. A. Van Dijk (Ed.), Macrostructures: An Interdisciplinary Study of Global Structures in Discourse Interaction and Cognition. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Meter, P., List, A., Lombardi, D., & Kendeou, P. (Eds.). (2020). Handbook of learning from multiple representations and perspectives. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villalon, J., & Calvo, R. A. (2011). Concept maps as cognitive visualizations of writing assignments. Educational Technology and Society, 14(3), 16–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, C. A., & Kintsch, W. (1991). Expository text. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 230–245). Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witherby, A. E., & Carpenter, S. K. (2021). The rich-get-richer effect: prior knowledge predicts new learning of domain-relevant information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000996

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wittrock, M. C. (1990). Generative process of comprehension. Educational Psychologist, 24(4), 345–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, H., & Leung, S.-O. (2017). Can Likert Scales be treated as interval scales? A simulation study. Journal of Social Service Research, 43(4), 527–532. https://doi.org/10.1080/01488376.2017.1329775

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiao, X. (2019). Xiao’s 1,000 practice questions for NEEP. Open University of China Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, D., Cai, Q., Luo, J., Yi, Z., Li, Y., Seger, C. A., & Chen, Q. (2021). The neural mechanism of spatial-positional association in working memory: A fMRI study. Brain and Cognition, 152, 105756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2021.105756

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 31970983) PI: Xuqian Chen, and the Graduate Research Innovation Project of School of Psychology, South China Normal University (No. hsxly2019025) PI: Ziqian Wei, and also the National Science Foundation, Education and Human Resources, Division of Undergraduate Education (No. 2215807) PI: Roy B. Clariana.

Funding

The National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 31970983), Xuqian Chen (PI), the Graduate Research Innovation Project of the School of Psychology, South China Normal University (No. hsxly2019025), Ziqian Wei (PI), and the Division of Undergraduate Education of the National Science Foundation (Award Abstract # 2215807), Roy B. Clariana (PI).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Philosophy and Social Science Laboratory of Reading and Development in Children and Adolescents (South China Normal University), Ministry of Education, China, and, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China

    Xuqian Chen, Ziqian Wei & Ziteng Li

  2. The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, 16801, USA

    Roy B. Clariana

Authors
  1. Xuqian Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ziqian Wei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ziteng Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Roy B. Clariana
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roy B. Clariana.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, X., Wei, Z., Li, Z. et al. The influence of the conceptual structure of external representations when relearning history content. Education Tech Research Dev 71, 415–439 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10176-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10176-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation