Advertisement

The effect of perceptual fluency on overcoming the interference of the More A-More B intuitive rule among primary school students in a perimeter comparison task: the perspective of cognitive load

  • 48 Accesses

Abstract

Recent research has shown that reducing the perceptual fluency of shape processing can be an effective means for overcoming the interference of the More A-More B intuitive rule among grade 3 students in a perimeter comparison task. From the perspective of cognitive load, the current study focused on the mechanism of perceptual fluency on overcoming the interference of the More A-More B intuitive rule among grade 3 students in a perimeter comparison task. The existing studies have suggested that perceptual disfluency will inevitably increase ECL in the task-solving process and thus potentially detrimental toward learning. However, we could argue that overcoming the interference of the More A-More B intuitive rule in the disfluent condition could be interpreted as a simultaneous increase in cognitive GCL. Because of the theoretically complementary relationship between ECL and GCL, two experiments were designed to respectively examine ECL and GCL under different perceptual fluency conditions in the perimeter comparison task. Experiment 1 (N = 33) used a dual-task paradigm to examine participants’ ECL, manipulating the clarity of shapes. The results indicated that participants experienced significantly less interference from the More A-More B intuitive rule under the low-perceptual-fluency condition than under the high-perceptual-fluency condition, while ECL was significantly higher under the former condition than under the latter one. Experiment 2 (N = 72) explored GCL in the perimeter comparison task through a self-designed transfer test, using an identical manipulation method of perceptual fluency as in experiment 1. Compared to the high-perceptual-fluency group, participants in the low-perceptual-fluency group performed significantly better in the perimeter comparison task and transfer test. It was concluded that low perceptual fluency resulted in participants’ ECL while at the same time producing GCL during completion of the perimeter comparison task.

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

Access options

Buy single article

Instant unlimited access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Price includes VAT for USA

Subscribe to journal

Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.

US$ 99

This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  1. Alter, A. L., Oppenheimer, D. M., Epley, N., & Eyre, R. N. (2007). Overcoming intuition: metacognitive difficulty activates analytic reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 136(4), 569–576.

  2. Author (under review). Overcoming the interference of the More A-More B intuitive rule among primary school students in a perimeter comparison task: the influence of perceptual fluency. Journal of Educational Psychology. Under review.

  3. Azhari, N. (1998). Using the intuitive rule “Same A-same B” in conservation tasks. Unpublished manuscript (in Hebrew).

  4. Babai, R., Levyadun, T., Stavy, R., & Tirosh, D. (2006a). Intuitive rules in science and mathematics: a reaction time study. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 37(8), 913–924.

  5. Babai, R., Levyadun, T., & Tirosh, R. S. D. (2006b). Intuitive rules in science and mathematics: a reaction time study. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science & Technology, 37(8), 913–924.

  6. Babai, R., Shalev, E., & Stavy, R. (2015). A warning intervention improves students’ ability to overcome intuitive interference. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47(5), 735–745.

  7. Babai, R., Nattiv, L., & Stavy, R. (2016). Comparison of perimeters: improving students’ performance by increasing the salience of the relevant variable. ZDM, 48(3), 367–378.

  8. Baddeley, A. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255(5044), 556–559.

  9. Bjork, R. A. (2013). Desirable difficulties perspective on learning. In H. Pashler (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the mind (Vol. 4, pp. 134–146). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication.

  10. Brünken, R., Plass, J. L., & Leutner, D. (2003). Direct measurement of cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational psychologist, 38(1), 53–61.

  11. Brünken, R., Steinbacher, S., Plass, J., & Leutner, D. (2004). Assessment of cognitive load in multimedia learning using dual-task methodology. Experimental Psychology, 49(2), 109–119.

  12. D’Amore, B., & Fandiño Pinilla, M. I. (2006). Relationships between area and perimeter: Beliefs of teachers and students. Mediterranean Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 5, 1–29.

  13. De Croock, M. B. M., Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (1998). High versus low contextual interference in simulation-based training of troubleshooting skills: effects on transfer performance and invested mental effort. Computers in Human Behaviour, 14(2), 249–267.

  14. Dean, A. L. (1976). The structure of imagery. Child Development, 47(4), 949–958.

  15. Dean, A. L., & Deist, S. (1980). Children’s precocious anticipatory images of end states. Child Development, 51(4), 1040–1049.

  16. DeLeeuw, K. E., & Mayer, R. E. (2008). A comparison of three measures of cognitive load: evidence for separable measures of intrinsic, extraneous, and germane load. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 223–234.

  17. Denes, G., & Pizzamiglio, L. (1999). Handbook of clinical and experimental neuropsychology (pp. 28–30). Hove: Psychology Press.

  18. Diemand-Yauman, C., Oppenheimer, D. M., & Vaughan, E. B. (2011). Fortune favors the bold (and the italicized): effects of disfluency on educational outcomes. Cognition, 118(1), 111–115.

  19. Eitel, A., Kühl, T., Scheiter, K., & Gerjets, P. (2014). Disfluency meets cognitive load in multimedia learning: does harder-to-read mean better-to-understand? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28(4), 488–501.

  20. Evans, J. S. B. T. (2010). Intuition and reasoning: a dual-process perspective. Psychological Inquiry, 21(4), 313–326.

  21. Forgas, J. P. (1995). Mood and judgment: the affect infusion model (AIM). Psychological Bulletin, 117(1), 39–66.

  22. Gillard, E., Dooren, W. V., Schaeken, W., & Verschaffel, L. (2009). Dual processes in the psychology of mathematics education and cognitive psychology. Human Development, 52(2), 95–108.

  23. Jong, T. D. (2010). Cognitive load theory, educational research, and instructional design: Some food for thought. Instructional Science, 38(2), 105–134.

  24. Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1999). Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13(4), 351–371.

  25. Kühl, T., & Eitel, A. (2016). Effects of disfluency on cognitive and metacognitive processes and outcomes. Metacognition and Learning, 11(1), 1–13.

  26. Lehmann, J., Goussios, C., & Seufert, T. (2016). Working memory capacity and disfluency effect: an aptitude-treatment-interaction study. Metacognition and Learning, 11(1), 89–105.

  27. Magreehan, D. A., Serra, M. J., Schwartz, N. H., & Narciss, S. (2016). Further boundary conditions for the effects of perceptual disfluency on judgments of learning. Metacognition and Learning, 11(1), 1–22.

  28. Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.

  29. Oppenheimer, D. M. (2008). The secret life of fluency. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(6), 237–241.

  30. Osman, M., & Stavy, R. (2006). Development of intuitive rules: evaluating the application of the dual-system framework to understanding children’s intuitive reasoning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13(6), 935–953.

  31. Paas, F., & Merriënboer, J. J. G. V. (1994). Instructional control of cognitive load in the training of complex cognitive tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 6(4), 351–371.

  32. Paas, F., Van Gog, T., & Sweller, J. (2010). Cognitive load theory: new conceptualizations, specifications, and integrated research perspectives. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), 115–121.

  33. Reber, R., & Schwarz, N. (1999). Effects of perceptual fluency on judgments of truth. Consciousness & Cognition, 8(3), 338–342.

  34. Reber, R., Schwarz, N., & Winkielman, P. (2004). Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: is beauty in the perceiver’s processing experience? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(4), 364–382.

  35. Schnotz, W., & Kürschner. (2007). A reconsideration of cognitive load theory. Educational Psychology Review, 19(4), 469–508.

  36. Song, H., & Schwarz, N. (2008). Fluency and the detection of misleading questions: low processing fluency attenuates the Moses illusion. Social Cognition, 26(6), 791–799.

  37. Stavy, R., & Babai, R. (2008). Complexity of shapes and quantitative reasoning in geometry. Mind Brain & Education, 2(2), 170–176.

  38. Stavy, R., & Babai, R. (2010). Overcoming intuitive interference in mathematics: insights from behavioral, brain imaging and intervention studies. ZDM the International Journal on Mathematics Education, 42(6), 621–633.

  39. Stavy, R., & Tirosh, D. (2000). How students (mis-) understand science and mathematics: intuitive rules. Teachers College Press.

  40. Stavy, R., Tsamir, P., & Tirosh, D. (2002). Intuitive rules: the case of “More A-More B”. reconsidering conceptual change: issues in theory and practice. Netherlands: Springer.

  41. Stavy, R., Goel, V., Critchley, H., & Dolan, R. (2006). Intuitive interference in quantitative reasoning. Brain Research, 1073-1074(1), 383–388.

  42. 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.

  43. Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), 123–138.

  44. Sweller, J., Merrienboer, J. J. G. V., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251–296.

  45. Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. New York: Springer.

  46. Tirosh, D., & Tsamir, P. (2014). Intuition in mathematics education. Netherlands: Springer.

  47. Winkielman, P., Schwarz, N., Fazendeiro, T. A., & Reber, R. (2003). The hedonic marking of processing fluency: implications for evaluative judgment. In J. Musch & K. C. Klauer (Eds.), The psychology of evaluation: affective processes in cognition and emotion (pp. 189–217). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  48. Ying, L., Liu, R. D., Star, J. Jia, W., Rui, Z., & Huimin, T. (2019). Overcoming the interference of the More A-More B intuitive rule among primary school students in a perimeter comparison task: the influence of perceptual fluency. Journal of Educational Psychology (in press)

  49. Yue, C. L., Castel, A. D., & Bjork, R. A. (2013). When disfluency is-and is not-a desirable difficulty: The influence of typeface clarity on metacognitive judgments and memory. Memory & Cognition, 41(2), 229–241.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Ru-De Liu.

Additional information

Ying Liu. School of Education, Hebei Normal University, Shijiazhuang, 050000, China. E-mail: chenmobenben@126.com. Web site: http://www.hebtu.edu.cn

Current themes of research:

Educational psychology and mathematics learning.

Most relevant publications in the field of Psychology of Education:

Ying, L., Liu, R. D., Yi, D., Jia, W., Rui, Z., & Le, X. (2016). How online basic psychological need satisfaction influences self-disclosure online among Chinese adolescents: moderated mediation effect of exhibitionism and narcissism. Front Psychol, 7, 1279.

Ru-De Liu. Beijing Key Laboratory of Applied Experimental Psychology, School of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100875, China. E-mail: rdliu@bnu.edu.cn (R. Liu). Web site: http://www.bnu.edu.cn

Current themes of research:

Educational psychology and mathematics learning.

Most relevant publications in the field of Psychology of Education:

Ying, L., Liu, R. D., Yi, D., Jia, W., Rui, Z., & Le, X. (2016). How online basic psychological need satisfaction influences self-disclosure online among Chinese adolescents: moderated mediation effect of exhibitionism and narcissism. Front Psychol, 7, 1279.

Liu, R. D., Ding, Y., Xu, L., & Wang, J. (2017). Involvement of working memory in mental multiplication in Chinese elementary students. Journal of Educational Research, 110(4), 1-11.

Liu, R. D., Ding, Y., Gao, B. C., & Zhang, D. (2015). The relations between number property strategies, working memory, and multiplication in elementary students. Journal of Experimental Education, 83(3), 319-343.

Jon R. Star. Graduate School of Education, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA. E-mail: jon_star@gse.harvard.edu. Web site: https://www.harvard.edu

Current themes of research:

Educational psychology and mathematics learning.

Most relevant publications in the field of Psychology of Education:

Star, J. R., Pollack, C., Durkin, K., Rittle-Johnson, B., Lynch, K., & Newton, K., et al. (2015). Learning from comparison in algebra. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 40, 41-54.

Star, J. R., Newton, K., Pollack, C., Kokka, K., Rittle-Johnson, B., & Durkin, K. (2015). Student, teacher, and instructional characteristics related to students’ gains in flexibility. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 41, 198-208.

Jia Wang. Teachers’ College, Beijing Union University, Beijing, China. E-mail: 657462433@qq.com

Current themes of research:

Educational psychology and mathematics learning.

Most relevant publications in the field of Psychology of Education:

Jia, W. , Ru-De, L. , Yi, D. , Le, X. , Ying, L. , & Rui, Z. . (2017). Teacher’s autonomy support and engagement in math: multiple mediating roles of selfefficacy, intrinsic value, and boredom. Front Psychol, 8, 1006-.

Huimin Tong. Wan Quan Primary school, Haidian District, Beijing, China. E-mail: 413841721@qq.com

Current themes of research:

Educational psychology and mathematics learning.

Publisher’s note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liu, Y., Liu, R., Star, J.R. et al. The effect of perceptual fluency on overcoming the interference of the More A-More B intuitive rule among primary school students in a perimeter comparison task: the perspective of cognitive load. Eur J Psychol Educ (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-019-00424-w

Download citation

Keywords

  • More A-More B intuitive rule
  • Perceptual fluency
  • Cognitive load
  • Perimeter comparison task