You are here:

Further evidence that concept mapping is not better than repeated retrieval as a tool for learning from texts
ARTICLE

, , , Universidad de Jaén, Spain

Learning and Instruction Volume 40, Number 1, ISSN 0959-4752 Publisher: Elsevier Ltd

Abstract

Karpicke and Blunt (2011) showed in college students that retrieval practice produced more learning from educational texts than concept mapping on a 1-week delayed test. This finding is surprising since concept mapping is thought to involve elaborative processing. Hence, the present study (N = 84; 76 females) aimed to examine whether the advantage of repeated retrieval remains when concept mapping is performed by

Citation

Lechuga, M.T., Ortega-Tudela, J.M. & Gómez-Ariza, C.J. (2015). Further evidence that concept mapping is not better than repeated retrieval as a tool for learning from texts. Learning and Instruction, 40(1), 61-68. Elsevier Ltd. Retrieved January 27, 2020 from .

This record was imported from Learning and Instruction on January 29, 2019. Learning and Instruction is a publication of Elsevier.

Full text is availabe on Science Direct: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.08.002

Keywords