Poster #25 - Combining Simultaneous and Spaced Presentations: Distributed Pairs in Children’s Generalization of STEM Concepts

• In Event: 1-005 - Poster Session 01
  In Poster Session: PS 01 Section - Cognitive Processes

Integrative Statement

Previous research has revealed that children’s categorization and generalization is highly influenced by the timing of exemplar presentations (Vlach, Ankowski, & Sandhofer, 2012; Vlach, Sandhofer, & Bjork, 2014; Vlach, Sandhofer, & Kornell, 2008). This work has demonstrated that presenting category exemplars at the same time (simultaneous schedule) and presenting category exemplars apart in time (spaced schedule) facilitate children’s generalization on different timescales. Simultaneous presentations promote generalization at an immediate test whereas spaced presentations support learners’ generalization at a delayed test. Given that these learning schedules promote generalization at different points in time, we asked: Can these presentation schedules be integrated to promote children’s generalization across timescales?
In this study, we examined the effects of simultaneous, distributed pairs (combination of simultaneous and spaced schedules), and spaced schedules in children’s categorization and generalization of science, technology, engineering, and mathematic (STEM) concepts. We hypothesized that the distributed pairs schedule, which may benefit from the advantages of both simultaneous and spaced schedules, would best facilitate children’s STEM learning.
Preschool-aged children (N = 170, M = 51.81 months) completed a distractor phase (Figure 1, Panel A), followed by a learning phase comprised of science concepts on simultaneous, distributed pairs, or spaced presentation schedules (Figure 1, Panel B), and were tested immediately or after a 5-minute delay (Figure 1, Panel C). The distractor phase included a single image unrelated to the science concept. The learning phase consisted of teaching science concepts to children by labeling the concept every time an exemplar was displayed (“This is an insect.”). The post-test included four images: the distractor image (previously presented), a novel, target science concept image (not previously presented during the learning phase), an image with similarities to the target image but not a member of the science category, and an irrelevant image. The post-test required children to generalize the learned science category to the novel example (“Can you point to the insect?”).
Results of simple effect analyses revealed no performance differences among the conditions at the immediate test (Figure 2). However, at the delayed test, children were better able to generalize science concepts in the spaced condition in comparison to the distributed pairs and simultaneous conditions (post-hoc comparisons with Bonferroni corrections), ps < .05. In contrast to our hypothesis, the distributed pairs schedule did not lead to stronger generalization at either testing timescale.
Overall, the current research suggests that simply combining simultaneous and spaced presentations into a distributed pairs schedule will not be more optimal than a spaced schedule alone. Our future research will take an individual differences approach to understand why some children benefit from a combined schedule whereas other children benefit from a simultaneous or spaced schedule. For instance, children with low long-term memory abilities may need as much spacing as possible, which provides children opportunities to practice retrieving information, to support this cognitive domain.

Authors

• Megan Kaul, University of Wisconsin-Madison
  Presenting Author

• Haley Vlach, University of Wisconsin-Madison
  Non-Presenting Author