Change one category at a time: Sequence effects beyond interleaving and blocking.

Research on study sequences has not considered the cross-classification of to-be-learned categories. In two experiments, we utilized cross-classified exemplars, which simultaneously belonged to categories of two orthogonal dimensions. Experiment 1 addressed the question of how interleaving one category dimension while simultaneous blocking another category dimension affects the induction of the simultaneously blocked category dimension. Experiment 2 examined our proposed mechanism by manipulating the degree of change (one-category vs. cross-category change) and the frequency of change (high vs. low) in the presentation sequence of exemplars with cross-classified characteristics. In Experiment 1, sequences that combined interleaving one dimension while blocking the other dimension were superior to sequences that provided no comparison opportunities when classifying both interleaved and blocked categories. This revealed a carry-over effect of interleaving: blocked and interleaved categories were equally well classified. Our findings are incompatible with the discriminative contrast hypothesis and the attentional bias framework, where interleaving is not assumed to support within-category comparisons. We explain the results according to the principle of change one category at a time (COCAT). Interleaving exemplars on one category dimension, but blocking them on another category dimension, enables learners to reliably map the distinctive features onto the covarying categories and the shared features onto the constant category. In contrast, there is a risk of confounding common characteristics when no comparison opportunities are given. Likewise, pure interleaving impedes category induction by confounding changing characteristics. Accordingly, Experiment 2 demonstrated that as long as a sequence implemented the COCAT principle, learners accurately identify diagnostic feature sets. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Null and Void? Errors in Meta-analysis on Perceptual Disfluency and Recommendations to Improve Meta-analytical Reproducibility.

In the 2018 meta-analysis of Educational Psychology Review entitled "Null effects of perceptual disfluency on learning outcomes in a text-based educational context" by Xie, Zhou, and Liu, we identify some errors and inconsistencies in both the methodological approach and the reported results regarding coding and effect sizes. While from a technical point of view the meta-analysis aligns with current meta-analytical guidelines (e.g., PRISMA) and conforms to general meta-analytical requirements (e.g., considering publication bias), it exemplifies certain insufficient practices in the creation and review of meta-analysis. We criticize the lack of transparency and negligence of open-science practices in the generation and reporting of results, which complicate evaluation of the meta-analytical reproducibility, especially given the flexibility in subjective choices regarding the analytical approach and the flexibility in creating the database. Here we present a framework applicable to pre- and post-publication review on improving the Methods Reproducibility of meta-analysis. Based on considerations of the transparency and openness (TOP)-guidlines (Nosek et al. Science 348: 1422-1425, 2015), the Reproducibility Enhancement Principles (REP; Stodden et al. Science 354:1240-1241, 2016), and recommendations by Lakens et al. (BMC Psychology 4: Article 24, 2016), we outline Computational Reproducibility (Level 1), Computational Verification (Level 2), Analysis Reproducibility (Level 3), and Outcome Reproducibility (Level 4). Applying reproducibility checks to TRANSFER performance as the chosen outcome variable, we found Xie's and colleagues' results to be (rather) robust. Yet, regarding RECALL performance and the moderator analysis, the identified problems raise doubts about the credibility of the reported results.

Psychometric properties of the Activities Scale for Kids-performance after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in adolescents and children : Results of a prospective study on behalf of the German-Austrian-Swiss GVHD Consortium.

BACKGROUND: The psychometric properties of an instrument, the Activity Scale for Kids-performance (ASKp), were assessed which was proposed to capture physical functioning after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Additionally, this multicenter observational prospective study investigated the influence of clinical correlates focusing on chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD). METHODS: Patient-reported ASKp, clinician-reported Karnofsky/Lansky status (KPS/PSS), patient characteristics and cGVHD details were assessed of 55 patients with a median age of 12 years at baseline after day +100 post-HSCT and every 3 months during the next 18 months. The psychometric properties were evaluated and ASKp and KPS/PSS status was compared using ANOVAS and multiple regression models. RESULTS: The German version of the ASKp showed good psychometric properties except for ceiling effects. Discrimination ability of the ASKp was good regarding the need for devices but failed to predict cGVHD patients. Both the ASKp and the KPS/PSS were associated with patients after adoptive cell therapy being in need for devices, suffering from overlap cGVHD and from steroid side effects but not with patients' age and gender. In contrast to the KPS/PSS the ASKp only showed significant differences after merging moderate and severe cGHVD patients when comparing them to No-cGVHD (F = 4.050; p = 0.049), being outperformed by the KPS/PSS (F = 20.082; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The ASKp showed no clear advantages compared to KPS/PSS even though economical and patients' effort was higher. Further application range may be limited through ceiling effects. Both should be taken into consideration. Therefore, the results may not support the usage of ASKp after HSCT and rather suggest KPS/PSS, both patient and clinician reported.

Similarity matters: A meta-analysis of interleaved learning and its moderators.

An interleaved presentation of items (as opposed to a blocked presentation) has been proposed to foster inductive learning (interleaving effect). A meta-analysis of the interleaving effect (based on 59 studies with 238 effect sizes nested in 158 samples) was conducted to quantify the magnitude of the interleaving effect, to test its generalizability across different settings and learning materials, and to examine moderators that could augment the theoretical models of interleaved learning. A multilevel meta-analysis revealed a moderate overall interleaving effect (Hedges' g = 0.42). Interleaved practice was best for studies using paintings (g = 0.67) and other visual materials. Results for studies using mathematical tasks revealed a small interleaving effect (g = 0.34), whereas results for expository texts and tastes were ambiguous with nonsignificant overall effects. An advantage of blocking compared with interleaving was found for studies based on words (g = -0.39). A multiple metaregression analysis revealed stronger interleaving effects for learning material more similar between categories, for learning material less similar within categories, and for more complex learning material. These results are consistent with the theoretical account of interleaved learning, most notably with the sequential theory of attention (attentional bias framework). We conclude that interleaving can effectively foster inductive learning but that the setting and the type of learning material must be considered. The interleaved learning, however, should be used with caution in certain conditions, especially for expository texts and words. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).