Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
R. Glaser (1967)
Good Frames and Bad.Psyccritiques, 12
J. Cook (1963)
"Superstition" in the Skinnerian.American Psychologist, 18
G. Faust, Richard Anderson (1967)
Effects of incidental material in a programmed Russian vocabulary lesson.Journal of educational psychology, 58 1
J. Levine (1965)
Prompting and confirmation as a function of the familiarity of stimulus materialsJournal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 4
J. Cook, M. Spitzer (1960)
Supplementary report: Prompting versus confirmation in paired-associate learning.Journal of experimental psychology, 59
J. Sidowski, F. Kopstein, Isabel Shillestad (1961)
Prompting and Confirmation Variables in Verbal LearningPsychological Reports, 8
J. Stanley, J. Krumboltz (1965)
Learning and the educational process
B. Underwood, R. Schulz (1960)
Meaningfulness and verbal learning
J. Holland (1965)
Response contingencies in teaching-machine programs.
Title: Associate Prof, of Educational Psychology and Psychology Age: 33 Degrees
Katie Wright, Emma Buchanan (1934)
Educational PsychologyTeachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education, 36
(1965)
Some Theoretical and Experimental Approaches to Problems in Written Instruction
E. Rothkopf (1966)
Learning from Written Instructive Materials: An Exploration of the Control of Inspection Behavior by Test-Like Events, 3
THE EFFECTS OF STRONG FORMAL PROMPTS IN PROGRAMED INSTRUCTION RICHAR D C. ANDERSO N and GERALD W. FAUST University of Illinois Authors of self-instructional programs are often cautioned to avoid "overprompting." It has never been demonstrated experimentally that "overprompting" inhibits learning. In fact, there is surprisingly little research on prompting considering the lengthy discussions and strongly- stated opinions which appear in treatises on programed instruction (Anderson, 1967). Current conceptions of prompting seem to be based largely on Skinner's (1957) speculative analysis of verbal behavior and the practical experience of programers (Markle, 1964). Most of the actual research on prompting has involved paired associ ate lists. It has been repeatedly demonstrated that people learn faster under a prompting procedure, in which both the stimulus term and re sponse term appear before the response is required, than under the anticipation method, or confirmation method, as it has been called in these studies (Cook and Spitzer, 1960; Sidowski, 1961; Levine, 1965). On the basis of these experiments, Cook (1963) has argued that the student should be shown the correct answer before he makes the response. Cook seems to be suggesting that the "copying frame" is an especially effective sort of teaching device.
American Educational Research Journal – SAGE
Published: Jun 23, 2016
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.