【作者】 赵楠；

【导师】 胡谊；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 发展与教育心理学， 2022， 博士

【摘要】 合作学习是人类积累知识的重要途径之一。在合作学习中,学习者基于已有知识,通过交互的认知过程(知识共建和群体觉知)来共同建构知识意义,监督彼此的认知活动,进而扩充各自的知识系统。其中,共有知识(common knowledge)是指合作学习前,群体内部对即将学习的内容共有一致的知识储备。知识共建(knowledge co-construction)是指群体成员将原有知识和新知识联系起来,进行深层整合加工的认知过程。群体觉知(group awareness)是指群体成员彼此监控各自的知识内容和知识水平的群体元认知过程。群体共有知识理论(common knowledge theory)认为,(1)拥有共有知识的群体成员对合作学习内容会产生相似理解,即形成认知齐性;(2)共有知识有助于群体成员相互理解,减少了成员们产生交流歧义的认知花费,认知盈余可被用来对新知识进行深层加工。根据群体认知神经科学,认知齐性会引发神经齐性,即脑间同步;后者被认为可能提示了人类合作与学习的脑间基础。虽然以往研究关注了个体已有知识如何促进学习的心理与神经基础,但针对“群体共有知识怎样促进合作学习”的研究较少,且存在以下几点局限:(1)多采用单一行为实证研究或问卷调查研究,而非采用多模态范式,即同时采集互动成员在学习场景中的行为和大脑数据;(2)关注某些特定学习内容,其结论或缺乏普遍性和适用性。(3)尚未明晰交互认知过程如何影响共有知识在合作学习中的作用。因此,本研究围绕“共有知识如何促进合作学习”,采用自然场景的学习范式,结合近红外超扫描手段,将探讨两个子问题:(1)共有知识如何促进合作学习?共有知识积极效应的普遍性如何?共有知识的脑间基础是怎样的?(2)合作学习中的交互认知过程(知识共建和群体觉知)如何影响(增强或减弱)共有知识对合作学习的作用?它们的脑间基础是怎样的?研究一(实验一、二、三)采用改编的合作学习范式,探讨第一个子问题。该范式包括四个部分:个人知识准备、测试、合作学习和后测。学习小组由两人组成。在个人准备阶段,被试被随机分配到两个条件:共有组(两人独自学习内容完全相同的知识)或互补组(两人独自学习内容不同且相互补充的知识)。之后测试被试在此阶段的学习表现。随后,在合作学习阶段,结合基于近红外的超扫描技术,同时收集学生学习图形推理规则(实验一)和德语词汇(实验二、三)时的大脑活动。实验一中,双方共同学习四条图形推理的规则及每个规则对应的两个示例。实验二和实验三的学习任务包含10个试次。每个试次中(实验二),两名被试共同学习1个新单词的拼写和释义,之后分别从9个单词组成的单词墙中选取1个在准备阶段学习过的单词(共2个)写在答题纸上,交流记忆单词的技巧。相较于实验二,实验三排除了其他单词对目标单词的干扰:要求两名被试共同学习1个新单词的拼写和释义,之后向被试直接呈现2个学习过的单词,不呈现其他单词,要求交流记忆单词的技巧。后测:学习表现测试和问卷(例如,深层加工、好感度、交流质量、胜任力、归属感和内部动机)。因此,在研究一中采用在群体层面操纵先验知识(共有vs.互补)的被试间实验设计。我们定义在后测中,“共有”条件与“互补”条件之间学习表现的差异反映了共有知识的效应。“共有”条件与“互补”条件在主观测量的心理变量上的差异反映了共有知识促学效应可能的心理基础。“共有”条件与“互补”条件之间脑间同步的差异反映了共有知识的脑间基础。研究一发现:相较于“互补”条件,“共有”条件的学习表现更好,深层加工评分更高;相较于“互补”条件,“共有”条件的脑间同步分别出现在左侧颞叶(实验一)和右侧颞叶(实验二和实验三);上述识别共有知识的脑间同步分别与学习表现和深层加工呈正相关。中介分析发现,“共有”条件下,存在从深层加工通过脑间同步影响学习表现的间接通路,提示深层加工可能是共有知识促学效应的心理基础;脑间同步有效反映了基于共有知识的交互认知过程。研究二(实验四)探讨第二个子问题。在合作学习阶段,操纵知识共建(有vs.无),对知识共建的操纵是要求两名被试分别从9个单词组成的单词墙中分别选取1个在准备阶段学习过的单词(共2个),与合作学习阶段的新单词(1个)组成一个语义通顺的简单句(“主+谓+宾”)。实验程序和学习内容与实验二相同。为了进一步揭示知识共建在“共有知识促学”中的作用,我们进行跨实验(实验二和实验四)分析,即采用2(先验知识:共有vs.互补)×2(知识共建:有vs.无)的被试间方差分析。我们定义在后测的学习表现中,“共有”条件与“互补”条件之间的差异反映了共有知识的效应。“有共建”条件与“无共建”条件之间的差异反映了知识共建的效应。“共有＿有共建”条件与“共有＿无共建”条件之间的差异反映了知识共建对共有知识促学效应的影响。“有共建”条件与“无共建”条件之间脑间同步的差异反映了知识共建的脑间基础。研究二发现:第一,相较于“互补”条件,“共有”条件的学习表现更好;相较于“无共建”条件,“有共建”条件的学习表现更好;先验知识与知识共建交互作用显著:“共有＿有共建”条件与“共有＿无共建”条件在学习表现上无差异;“互补＿有共建”条件的学习表现显著优于“互补＿无共建”条件的学习表现。第二,在深层加工上,先验知识与知识共建的交互作用显著:相比于“互补＿无共建”条件,“共有＿无共建”条件的评分更高;“互补＿有共建”与“共有＿有共建”无显著差异。第三,相较于“无共建”条件,“有共建”条件的脑间同步出现在右侧前额叶;第四,识别知识共建的脑间同步分别与后测的学习表现和深层加工评分呈正相关。第五,中介分析发现,“共建”条件下,存在从深层加工通过脑间同步影响学习表现的间接通路,提示深层加工可能是知识共建促学效应的心理基础;脑间同步有效的反映了知识共建这一交互认知过程。研究三(实验五)探讨第二个子问题。在合作学习阶段,操纵群体觉知(有vs.无),对群体觉知的操纵是通过实验程序向被试提示:组内成员A和B对2个学习过的单词的掌握情况。具体地,提示线索(A或B)直接出现在相应单词下方:“AB”代表两人都掌握了该单词;“A”“B”代表其中一个人掌握了该单词;空白代表两人都未掌握该单词。其他实验程序和学习内容与实验三相同。为了进一步揭示群体觉知在“共有知识促学”中的作用,我们进行跨实验(实验三和实验五)分析,即采用2(先验知识:共有vs.互补)×2(群体觉知:有vs.无)的被试间方差分析。我们定义在后测中,“共有”条件与“互补”条件之间的差异反映了共有知识的效应。“有觉知”条件与“无觉知”条件之间的差异反映了群体觉知的效应。“共有＿有觉知”条件与“共有＿无觉知”条件之间的差异反映了群体觉知对共有知识促学效应的影响。“有觉知”条件与“无觉知”条件之间脑间同步的差异反映了群体觉知的脑间基础。研究三发现:第一,相较于“互补”条件,“共有”条件的学习表现更好;相较于“无觉知”条件,“有觉知”条件的学习表现更好;先验知识与群体觉知的交互作用显著:“共有＿有觉知”条件的学习表现优于“共有＿无觉知”条件的学习表现;“互补＿有觉知”条件的学习表现与“互补＿无觉知”条件的学习表现无差异。第二,在群体觉知的主观评分上,相较于“互补”条件,“共有”条件的评分更高;相较于“无觉知”条件,“有觉知”条件的评分更高。第三,相较于“无觉知”条件,“有觉知”条件下的脑间同步出现在右侧前额叶;上述识别群体觉知的脑间同步分别与学习表现和群体觉知的主观评分呈正相关。上述结果说明:第一,无论学习内容是非言语学习还是言语学习,学习任务是难还是易,共有知识都会促进学习表现;其心理基础可能是合作学习中的深层加工;在学习过程中出现的脑间同步,主要在左侧颞叶和右侧颞叶,分别对应上述两类学习内容;上述脑间同步都能预测合作学习表现。第二,深层加工是知识共建和共有知识潜在共同的心理基础,知识共建会弥补学生之间缺乏共有知识的缺陷,发挥和共有知识相似的促进学习的作用;同时,识别知识共建的脑间同步出现在右侧额叶;脑间同步能预测学习表现。第三,群体觉知既能促进合作学习,又能扩大共有知识的促学优势;与群体觉知有关的脑同步出现在右侧前额叶;脑间同步能预测合作学习表现。上述发现支持了群体共有知识理论和群体认知神经科学的相关研究假设。进一步,本研究:(1)在“群脑”层面,发现了共有知识引发的脑间同步;并且知识共建与群体觉知都能引发相应的脑间同步;这表明,共有知识与交互认知活动一起塑造了学习者之间的大脑活动,支撑着合作学习过程;(2)在认知层面,共有知识促进合作学习的这一优势,既会被知识共建所削弱,也会被群体觉知所扩大;这体现了知识与交互认知过程对学习活动的或互补、或增进的作用。因此,本研究是在教育心理学中应用群体认知神经科学技术的重要尝试,在理论层面上为群体知识理论提供了行为和神经层面的关键证据,在实践意义上为合作学习策略和教学方法指导提供了有力参考。更多还原

【Abstract】 Cooperative learning is one of the powerful assets in pedagogy.In cooperative learning,based on prior knowledge,learners jointly master knowledge through interactive cognitive processes(i.e.,knowledge co-construction and group awareness),and then expand their respective knowledge systems.Common knowledge refers to the shared knowledge of the content within the group before cooperative learning.Knowledge co-construction refers to group members conducting deep processed integration by linking prior knowledge with new knowledge.As a group metacognitive process,group awareness refers to group members monitor each other’s knowledge content and knowledge level.The common knowledge theory suggests that(1)group members with common knowledge have a similar understanding of cooperative learning content,that is,to form cognitive alignment;(2)common knowledge facilitates mutual understanding,reduces the cognitive cost of communicating ambiguity among members,and cognitive surplus can be used to further process new knowledge.According to group cognitive neuroscience,cognitive alignment leads to neural alignment,that is,interbrain synchronization;the latter is thought to possibly hint at the inter-brain basis of human cooperation and learning.Although previous studies have focused on the psychological and neural basis of how individuals’ prior knowledge promotes learning performance,the studies on "how common knowledge promotes cooperative learning" are lack.And these studies have following limitations:(1)Behavioral empirical studies or questionnaires are mostly used rather than adopting multi-modal paradigm,that is,collecting the behavior and brain data of interactive members simultaneously in learning scenarios;(2)Focusing on some specific learning content,its conclusions may lack generality and applicability.(3)It is not clear how the interactive cognitive process affects the role of common knowledge in cooperative learning.Therefore,this study focuses on "how common knowledge promotes cooperative learning",adopting the adapted cooperative learning paradigm,and f NIRS-based hyperscanning to explore two subquestions:(1)How does common knowledge facilitate collaborative learning? How about the generality of the positive effect of common knowledge? What is the brainto-brain basis of common knowledge?(2)How do the interactive cognitive processes(knowledge co-construction and group awareness)in cooperative learning affect(enhance or weaken)the effect of common knowledge on cooperative learning? How about their inter-brain basis?Study 1(Experiments 1,2,and 3)employed an adapted cooperative learning paradigm to explore the first sub-question.The paradigm consists of four sessions:individual knowledge preparation,pre-test,cooperative learning,and post-test.In the individual preparation stage,participants were randomly assigned to two groups: the common group(mastered the same knowledge by themselves)or the complementary group(mastered different and complementary knowledge by themselves).Then the learning performance was tested.In the cooperative learning stage,f NIRS-based hyperscanning was used to adopt the brain activity of dyads when they study the rules of graphical reasoning(experiment 1)and German words(experiments 2 and 3).In experiment 1,dyads jointly learned four rules of graph reasoning and two examples corresponding to each rule.The learning tasks of Experiment 2 and Experiment 3consist of 10 trials.In each trial(Experiment 2),dyads jointly learned the spelling and interpretation of a new word,and then separately selected 1 word from the “word wall”consisting of 9 words,which had been learned in the preparation stage.Then they were asked to communicate the skills of memorizing words.Compared to Experiment2,Experiment 3 eliminated the interference of other words on the target word: two subjects were asked to learn the spelling and interpretation of a new word together,and then the subjects were directly presented with the 2 learned words and no other words were presented.The post-test consisted of learning performance tests and questionnaires(e.g.,deep processing,favorability,communication quality,competence,dependence,and intrinsic motivation).Study 2(Experiment 4)explored the second sub-problem.In the cooperative learning stage,the knowledge co-construction was manipulated(present vs.absent).Specifically,dyads were asked to separately select 1 word from the word wall to form a simple sentence(“subject + predicate + object”)with the new words in the cooperative learning stage.The procedures and learning content are the same as those of Experiment 2.In order to further reveal the role of knowledge co-construction in "positive effect of common knowledge",we conducted a cross-experiment(Experiment 2 and Experiment 4)analysis: 2(prior knowledge: common vs.Complementary)× 2(knowledge co-construction: present vs.absent).Study 3(Experiment 5)explored the second sub-problem.In the cooperative learning stage,group awareness was manipulated(present vs.absent),Specifically,dyads were told whether they mastered the words which had been learned in preparation stage.Specifically,the cue(A or B)appears directly below the corresponding word: "AB" represented both of them have mastered the word;"A" "B" represented one of them has mastered the word;blank represented neither of them have mastered the word.The procedures and learning content were the same as in Experiment 3.In order to further reveal the role of group awareness in "positive effect of common knowledge",we conducted a cross-experiment(Experiment 3 and Experiment 5)analysis: 2(prior knowledge: common vs.complementary)× 2(group awareness: present vs.absent).The results showed that: First,no matter the learning content is non-verbal learning(Experiments 1)or verbal learning(Experiments 2 and 3),and the learning task is difficult(Experiments 2)or easy(Experiments 3),common knowledge promoted learning performance;its psychological basis may be the deep processing in cooperative learning;Inter-brain synchronization,mainly in the left temporal cortex and the right temporal cortex,corresponds to the above two types of learning content;the above inter-brain synchronization predicted the learning performance.Second,deeply processing was the potential common psychological basis for knowledge coconstruction and common knowledge.Knowledge co-construction would make up for the lack of common knowledge among students,and played a similar role in promoting learning as common knowledge.Inter-brain synchronization existed in the right frontal cortex;this inter-brain synchronization predicted learning performance.Third,group awareness can both promote cooperative learning and expand the learning-promoting advantage of common knowledge;Inter-brain synchronization associated with group awareness occurred in the right prefrontal cortex;this interbrain synchronization predicted the learning performance.The above findings supported the hypotheses of group knowledge theory and group cognitive neuroscience.Specifically,(1)At the "group brain" level,we found the inter-brain synchronization identified the interactive learning process based on common knowledge;and both knowledge co-construction and group awareness can also be identified by inter-brain synchronization;this study showed that common knowledge and interactive cognitive process together shaped the brain activity of collaborative learning dyad and supported the process of cooperative learning;(2)At the cognitive level,the positive effect of common knowledge were not only be weakened by knowledge co-construction,but also be expanded by group awareness.These results reflected the role of knowledge and interactive cognitive processes in learning activities.Therefore,this study was an important attempt to apply group cognitive neuroscience technique in educational psychology,providing key evidence at the behavioral and neural levels for group knowledge theory.At the practical level,it provided a powerful reference for cooperative learning strategies and teaching method guidance.更多还原