Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14695/KJSOS.2014.17.1.3

The effects of learning method, learning schedule, and task difficulty on the learning of computer software  

Kim, Kyung-Su (Department of Industrial Psychology, Kwangwoon University)
Li, Hyung-Chul (Department of Industrial Psychology, Kwangwoon University)
Kim, Shinwoo (Department of Industrial Psychology, Kwangwoon University)
Publication Information
Science of Emotion and Sensibility / v.17, no.1, 2014 , pp. 3-12 More about this Journal
Abstract
Quick and accurate learning of diverse electronic products has become an important daily task. In particular, software occupies core status in the control and operation of the products. This research tested the effects of learning method, schedule, and task difficulty in the learning of software. Using 2 (learning method: experiential vs. verbal) ${\times}$ 2 (learning schedule: spaced vs. massed) ${\times}$ 2 (difficulty: easy vs. difficult) between-subjects design, Experiment 1 tested participants' learning of file control using Windows Movie Maker. There was no effect of learning schedule on task completion time, but participants in experiential learning were faster in the completion of evaluation task compared with those in verbal learning condition. Importantly, as task difficulty increases participants in verbal condition showed markedly lower performance than those in experiential condition, which suggests that experiential learning is more effective with more difficult learning task. That is, in case of learning simple operation of software verbal learning using linguistic manual or instruction could be sufficient; on the other hand in case of learning complex operation learning from experience or tutorial mode would be more effective. Additional studies which manipulated task difficulty (Expt. 2) and inter-trial learning interval (Expt. 3) did not produce meaningful results.
Keywords
software learning; task difficulty; learning method; learning schedule;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Anderson, J. R. (1999). Skill acquisition. In J. R. Anderson (Ed.), Learning and Memory, New York: John Miller. 304-337
2 Appleton-Knapp, S. L., Bjork, R. A., & Wickens, T. D. (2005). Examining the spacing effect in advertising: Encoding variability, retrieval processes, and their Interaction. Journal of Consumer Research, 32, 266-276.   DOI
3 Bjork, R. A. & Allen, T. W. (1970). The spacing effect: Consolidation or differential encoding? Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 9, 567-572.   DOI
4 Burson, K. A. (2007). Consumer-product skill matching: The effects of difficulty on relative self-assessment and choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 104-110.   DOI
5 Dempster, F. N. (1996). Distributing and managing the conditions of encoding and practice. In R. Bjork, & E. Bjork (Eds.), Memory (pp. 317-344). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
6 Ebbinghaus, H. (1885). Memory: A contribution to experimental psychology (Henry A. Ruger & Clara E. Bussenius, Trans.). New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
7 Janiszewski, C., Hayden, N., & Sawyer, A. G. (2003). A meta-analysis of the spacing effect in verbal learning: Implications for research on advertising repetition and consumer memory. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(1), 138-149.   DOI
8 Lakshmanan, A., Lindsey, C. D., & Krishnan, H. S. (2010). Practice Makes Perfect? When does massed learning improve product usage proficiency? Journal of Consumer Research, 37, 599-613.   DOI
9 Lee, T. D. & Magill, R. A. (1983). The locus of contextual interference in motor-skill acquisition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, 730-746.   DOI
10 Nokes, T. J., & Ohlsson, S. (2005). Comparing multiple paths to mastery: What is learned? Cognitive Science, 29, 769-96.   DOI
11 Schmidt, R. A. & Bjork, R. A. (1992). New conceptuali zations of practice: Common principles in three paradigms suggest new concepts for training. Psychological Science, 3, 207-217.   DOI
12 Shea, C. H., Lai, Q., Black, C., & Park, J. H. (2000). Spacing practice sessions across days benefits the learning of motor skills. Human Movement Science, 19, 737-760.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Squire, L. R., Knowlton, B. J., & Musen, G. (1993). The Structure and Organization of Memory. Annual Review of Psychology, 44, 453-495.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Taatgen, N. A., Huss, D., Dickison, D., & Anderson, J. A. (2008). The acquisition of robust and flexible cognitive skills. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 548-565.   DOI
15 Thompson, D. V., Hamilton, R. W., & Rust, R. T. (2005). Feature fatigue: When product capabilities become too much of a good thing. Journal of Marketing Research, 42, 431-42.   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Wulf, G., & Shea, C. H. (2002). Principles derived from the study of simple motor skills do not generalize to complex skill learning. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9, 185-211.   DOI   ScienceOn