Abstract
A goal of successful learning is the transfer of learned knowledge to novel situations. However, spontaneous transfer is notoriously difficult to achieve. In this research, we argue that learning and transfer can be facilitated when knowledge is expressed in an abstract, generic form. In Experiments 1 and 2, undergraduate students learned two isomorphic domains, which were based on the same algebraic group, with one domain expressed in a more abstract, generic form and the other expressed in a more concrete form. In both experiments, transfer from more abstract to more concrete was greater than the reverse. In Experiment 3, undergraduate students learned the same algebraic group under varying degrees of concreteness. Our results demonstrate that the use of perceptually rich, concrete symbols may hinder learning. This research indicates that concreteness may have substantial learning and transfer costs, whereas abstractness may have benefits.
Article PDF
References
Ball, D. L. (1992). Magical hopes: Manipulatives and the reform of math education.American Educator,16, 14–18.
Bassok, M., &Holyoak, K. J. (1989). Interdomain transfer between isomorphic topics in algebra and physics.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,15, 153–166.
Bassok, M., &Olseth, K. L. (1995). Object-based representations: Transfer between cases of continuous and discrete models of change.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 1522–1538.
Bassok, M., Wu, L.-L., &Olseth, K. L. (1995). Judging a book by its cover: Interpretative effects of context on problem-solving transfer.Memory & Cognition,23, 354–367.
Cobb, P., Yackel, E., &Wood, T. (1992). A constructivist alternative to the representational view of mind in mathematics education.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,23, 2–33.
DeLoache, J. S. (2000). Dual representation and young children’s use of scale models.Child Development,71, 329–338.
Detterman, D. K. (1993). The case for the prosecution: Transfer as an epiphenomenon. In D. K. Detterman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.),Transfer on trial: Intelligence, cognition, and instruction (pp. 1–24). Westport, CT: Ablex.
Dienes, Z. P. (1960).Building up mathematics. London: Hutchinson.
Gentner, D., &Medina, J. (1998). Similarity and the development of rules.Cognition,65, 263–297.
Gentner, D., &Rattermann, M. J. (1991). Language and the career of similarity. In S. A. Gelman & J. P. Byrnes (Eds.),Perspectives on thought and language: Interrelations in development (pp. 225–277). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goldstone, R. L., &Sakamoto, Y. (2003). The transfer of abstract principles governing complex adaptive systems.Cognitive Psychology,46, 414–466.
Howard, P., Perry, B., & Tracey, D. (1997).Mathematics and manipulatives: Comparing primary and secondary teachers’ views. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Brisbane.
Markman, A. B., &Gentner, D. (1993). Structural alignment during similarity comparisons.Cognitive Psychology,25, 431–467.
Ross, B. H. (1984). Remindings and their effects in learning a cognitive skill.Cognitive Psychology,16, 371–416.
Ross, B. H. (1987). This is like that: The use of earlier problems and the separation of similarity effects.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,13, 629–639.
Ross, B. H. (1989). Distinguishing types of superficial similarities: Different effects on the access and use of earlier problems.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,15, 456–468.
Schwartz, D. L. (1995). Reasoning about the referent of a picture versus reasoning about the picture as the referent: An effect of visual realism.Memory & Cognition,23, 709–722.
Uttal, D. H., Liu, L. L., &DeLoache, J. S. (1999). Taking a hard look at concreteness: Do concrete objects help young children learn symbolic relations? In L. Balter & C. Tamis-LeMonda (Eds.),Child psychology: A handbook of contemporary issues (pp. 177–192). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research has been supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation (REC 0208103) to V.M.S.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sloutsky, V.M., Kaminski, J.A. & Heckler, A.F. The advantage of simple symbols for learning and transfer. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 12, 508–513 (2005). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193796
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193796