1. Anique de Bruin Erasmus University Rotterdam Metacognition and cognitive load The effect of self-explanation when learning to play chess

2. Goal present studies Initial framework:  Expertise development Deliberate practice (Ericsson et al., 1993):  metacognitive activities crucial for expertise development  Rehearsal and correction of errors

3. Metacognitive strategies Self-explanations: –Process more deliberately –Recognizing inconsistencies –Stimulate integration new information  Enhances accuracy metacognition

4. Metacognition in skill acquisition  To what extent do metacognitive activities foster learning in skill domains (chess)? -non-verbal nature of material -no explicit information provided -novices

5. Self-explanations in chess Three groups (N = 15 per group): 1.Observation only (O) 2.Predict next move (PO) 3.Predict and self- explain next move (PSE)

6. Procedure Three phases: –Basic rules –Learning phase: Predict and self-explain Prediction only Observation –Test phase: play against computer

7. Discover chess principles Chess rules: too little information to play endgame  Chess principles necessary: King checkmated at the edge of the board Rook minimizes space of the King What instruction fosters development of principled understanding most?

8. Results learning phase

9. Self-explanations Three categories: 1.Basic chess rules 2.Partial explanation of principles 3.Complete explanation of principles

10. Results self-explanations Median split on number of SEs: High-explainers: >51 (mean=95.1) Low-explainers: <51 (mean=32.4)  Compare differences in SE and chess performance between high- and low-explainers

11. Chess rule explanations

12. Partial principle explanations

13. Complete principle explanations

14. Results self-explanations Test exercises: high-expl more checkmate than low-expl However: No difference in time needed to self-explain

15. Results test phase

16. Cognitive load From CL perspective surprising: –Despite low prior knowledge, prediction + self-explanation foster learning  better principled understanding What (meta)cognitive mechanisms explain SE effect in novices?

17. Conclusions I More explanation of basic chess rules  better discovery of principles Rehearsing basic rules frees up processing resources for principle discovery

18. Conclusions II Verbalization of self-explanations crucial: No effect in PO condition –Meaningful self-explanations Wording of the SE instruction: Explain why the computer would make that move No re-reads (as in text learning) possible –Verbalized (partial) discoveries of principles receive more activation in WM

19. Future research Examine covert self-explanation in PO condition Test effect SE only Manipulate rehearsal of basic chess rules to test effect on principle discovery

20. Thank you Questions?