Self-regulatory processes in error management training [Elektronische Ressource] / vorgelegt von Nina Keith

Sujets

• Psychologie

Informations

• Publié par: justus-liebig-universitat_giessen
• Publié le: 01 janvier 2005
• Nombre de lectures: 9
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 1 Mo

Extrait

SELF-REGULATORY PROCESSES
IN ERROR MANAGEMENT TRAINING




Inaugural-Dissertation
zur Erlangung
des Doktorgrades der Philosophie
des Fachbereiches 06 Psychologie und Sportwissenschaft
der Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen







vorgelegt von


Nina Keith


aus Frankfurt




2005



































Dekan/in: Prof. Dr. Joachim Stiensmeier-Pelster
1. Berichterstatter/in: Prof. Dr. Michael Frese
2. Berichterstatter/in: Prof. Dr. Sabine Sonnentag
Acknowledgements


First of all I would like to thank Michael Frese and Sabine Sonnentag for their support
and for providing valuable suggestions and ideas in various stages of this research.
Moreover, I would like to thank the visiting professors to our department who gave me
the opportunity to discuss my research: Rich Arvey, Rick DeShon, Winfried Hacker,
Dan Ilgen, Ruth Kanfer, Steve Kozlowski, Frank Landy, and Ben Schneider. My thanks
also go to Doris Fay for her advice and suggestions.
Many students were involved in data collection of the presently reported studies or of
studies that served as pilots for the reported ones; I would like to thank Christiane
Haupt, Sonja Kauke, Heiko Müller, Leonore Schulze, and Saskia Trinkaus for their
help. Thanks are also due to the many volunteer students who participated in the
studies.
I would like to thank Inga Hoever and Lisa Trierweiler for proofreading parts of this
dissertation and for translating the study material. The whole dissertation was read and
commented on by Tobias Richter with whom I also discussed my research many times.
Finally, I would like to thank my mother, my father, and my brother for their emotional
support. My special thanks go to Tobias Richter. Abstract

Error management training is an active training approach. In contrast to traditional error
avoidant trainings that provide detailed tasks instructions in order to prevent errors during
training, error management training encourages participants to make errors and to learn from
them. Although many studies have shown error management training to lead to better
performance than error avoidant training, several issues concerning the effectiveness of error
management training remain unsolved. The present dissertation compiles three studies that
aimed to illuminate the psychological processes underlying the effectiveness of error
management training and the conditions that promote or restrict its effectiveness.
Study 1 tested the notion that self-regulatory processes (emotion control and metacognitive
activity) mediate the effectiveness of error management training. It further explored whether a
new variant of error management training designed to enhance metacognitive activity leads to a
performance increment. Fifty-five volunteer students learned a computer program under 1 of 3
conditions: error avoidant training, error management training, or a variant of error management
training that included a metacognitive module. As predicted, both forms of error management
training lead to better transfer performance than error avoidant training (d=0.75), but the two
error management training groups did not differ. Mediation hypotheses were fully supported:
Emotion control (assessed with a self-report questionnaire) and metacognitive activity (assessed
with a measure derived from verbal protocol analysis) mediated performance differences. These
findings highlight the potential of promoting self-regulatory processing during training.
Study 2 compared error management training and error avoidant training, with a focus on
interactions between cognitive ability and training condition. It also explicitly distinguished
training from transfer performance. Participants were 110 volunteer university students who
learned a computer program in 1 of the 2 conditions. As predicted, error avoidant training led to
better immediate training performance than error management training, but this effect was
reversed for novel transfer tasks. Further, interactions of training and cognitive ability emerged
as expected: Cognitive ability predicted training performance in both error management and
error avoidant training, but it predicted transfer performance only in the error avoidant training
group. This pattern of results is consistent with resource allocation models which suggest that
with practice, tasks become less dependent on cognitive ability.
Study 3 meta-analyzed 23 studies (N=1981) that evaluated error management training against
alternative trainings. The overall mean effect size was positive (Cohen's d=0.44). As
hypothesized, effect sizes tended to be larger for tasks with clear feedback (d=0.57) and were
significantly larger for test than for training performance (test performance: d=0.58), for transfer
tasks that were dissimilar from training tasks (d=0.80), and when guided trainings were the
alternative training (d=0.65). Error management training was also more effective than unguided
trainings without error management instructions (d=0.21). To maximize benefits, these
moderating factors should be considered when designing error management training.
The present studies demonstrate that integrating errors explicitly into training rather than
avoiding them can be a fruitful approach to promote performance on novel transfer tasks.
Elements of error management training may be incorporated into existing training forms such as
behavior modeling, because learning from errors possibly leads to more flexible and adaptable
behavior than practicing only correct behaviors. Future research could also examine whether
participants of error management training apply the self-regulatory skills learned in training
(emotion control and metacognitive activity) to work tasks that are seemingly unrelated to the
particular training content. TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Introduction........................................................................................................................ 3
2 Self-Regulation in Error Management Training: Emotion Control and
Metacognition as Mediators of Performance Effects ............................................................ 8
2.1 The Concept of Error Management Training...................................................... 9
2.2 Processes in Error Management Training ........................................................ 13
2.2.1 Emotion Control in Error Management Training .......................................... 13
2.2.2 Metacognition in Error Manageme.............................................. 14
2.3 Method ............................................................................................................... 17
2.3.1 Participants.....................................................................................................17
2.3.2 Experimental Design and Procedure.............................................................. 17
2.3.3 Measures........................................................................................................21
2.4 Results................................................................................................................ 27
2.4.1 Intercorrelations of Study Variables 27
2.4.2 Manipulation Checks.....................................................................................27
2.4.3 Main Effects of Training Condition on Transfer Performance...................... 30
2.4.4 Emotion Control and Metacognitive Activity as Mediators of Adaptive
Transfer Performance................................................................................................. 31
2.5 Discussion.......................................................................................................... 34
2.5.1 Strengths and Limitations..............................................................................36
2.5.2 Implications for Future Research................................................................... 38
2.5.3 Implications for Theory and Practice............................................................. 42
3 Error Management Training as Moderator of the Cognitive
Ability/Performance Relationship ........................................................................................ 45
3.1 Error Management Training and Performance................................................. 46
3.2 Cognitive Ability, Error Management Training, and Performance .................. 50
3.3 Method ............................................................................................................... 54
3.3.1 Participants.....................................................................................................54
3.3.2 Experimental Design and Procedure.............................................................. 54
3.3.3 Measures........................................................................................................57
3.4 Results................................................................................................................ 58