B.S. Research Paper Example (Empirical Research Paper)

B.S. Research Paper Example (Empirical Research Paper)

This is an example of a research paper that was written in fulfillment of the B.S.

research paper requirement. It uses APA style for all aspects except the cover

sheet (this page; the cover sheet is required by the department). It describes

research that the author was involved in while taking the PSYC 199 course.

The Effects of Interleaving Versus Blocking for

Article title

Learning to Conjugate Verbs in the Spanish Language

Jon Student, Psychology 199, Spring and Fall 2016

Name, when research was

conducted, PID

PID# A1234567

Thurgood Marshall College

Faculty Advisor: Professor Timothy Rickard

College, faculty advisor

_________________________________________

Faculty advisor signature

______________________

Date

Your faculty advisor will have to read the completed paper prior to submission. Their

signature and date, indicating approval of the paper, is required.

This example was written by a student who had the opportunity to assist with

multiple aspects of experimental research in a laboratory at UCSD (including

completion of data collection and subsequent data analysis).

For further information about the BS paper requirement, please visit:



For information and tips about writing research papers in APA style, please visit:



Running head: INTERLEAVING AND LANGUAGE LEARNING

1

This is the title page in traditional APA style.

The Effects of Interleaving Versus Blocking for

Article title

Learning to Conjugate Verbs in the Spanish Language

Jon Student

Department of Psychology

Name and

affiliation

University of California, San Diego

Author note

Author Note

Jon Student, Department of Psychology, University of California, San Diego.

This article was completed in fulfillment of the requirements for the author¡¯s Bachelor of

Science (B.S.) degree in Psychology at the University of California, San Diego. The author was

advised by Steven C. Pan and Professor Timothy C. Rickard.

Please address correspondence to: Jon Student, Department of Psychology, University of

California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0109. Email: jstudent@ucsd.edu

Author Notes have up to four paragraphs. These often discuss author affiliation, any

change affiliation, acknowledgments, and addresses for correspondence.

INTERLEAVING AND LANGUAGE LEARNING

Abstract

Interleaving, a learning technique which involves practicing on multiple skills in parallel, goes

against the standard method of blocking (or blocked training) that is common in schools and in

many types of implicit skill training (for example, practicing a sport). While blocked training is

convenient for many learners, several previous studies have shown that interleaving can yield

statistically significant advantages in learning and in improving memory over blocking. The

present study explored the effects of interleaving versus blocked training for learning Spanish

verb conjugation skills. Participants with many different language backgrounds (excepting

Spanish) learned to conjugate verbs in the Spanish imperfect and preterite tenses in either a

blocked format or interleaved format (in a between-subjects design). After a one-week delay, a

verb conjugation test was administered. On average, participants learned Spanish verb

conjugation skills better if they had been trained using interleaving. This result suggests that

interleaving can be beneficial for foreign language learning.

The Abstract is typically no more than 250 words in length. It is prefaced with the

centered word ¡°Abstract¡±, and is a one-paragraph summary. It is not indented.

2

INTERLEAVING AND LANGUAGE LEARNING

The Effects of Interleaving Versus Blocking for

3

Article title

Learning to Conjugate Verbs in the Spanish Language

For over a decade, learning scientists have compared the effects of learning one skill or

topic at a time (blocking or blocked training) against a technique in which two or more skills are

learned simultaneously by switching back and forth between them (interleaving or interleaved

training). Some studies have found benefits of interleaving and others have found benefits to

blocking. For instance, interleaving benefits have been observed for learning algebraic rules

(e.g., Mayfield & Chase, 2002) and geometric concepts (e.g., Taylor & Rohrer, 2010), whereas

blocking benefits have been observed for learning to identify degrees of varying line segments

(e.g., Goldstone, 1996) and French pronunciation rules (e.g., Carpenter & Mueller, 2013).

Most schools implement blocking for a variety of topics because classes typically do not

have enough time during the day to get through entire lesson plans. The use of blocked

scheduling, wherein only one skill or concept is covered at one time, alleviates these types of

problems. Other reasons include the fact that it is easier for both teachers and students to use

blocking because it involves simpler schedules. But is this type of training method optimal for

learning, and more importantly, does it yield better retention of learned information and skills

over time than interleaving?

To date, there has been little evidence of benefits of interleaving for language learning,

relative to blocking. Specifically, in an experiment where English-speaking participants learned

French pronunciation rules (e.g., Carpenter and Mueller, 2013), practice occurred in blocked or

interleaved format and was immediately followed by a final test. Performance was better after

blocked training. However, that study measured the direct and immediate retention of learned

information and not necessarily the information that would still be remembered after participants

The Introduction section is the first major section of text. It introduces the topic under

investigation, reviews prior research on it, and discusses the research that is to follow.

INTERLEAVING AND LANGUAGE LEARNING

4

were able to spend time doing other everyday tasks. By contrast, in the present study, which

examined the use of blocked or interleaved training for learning Spanish verb conjugation skills

(i.e., a type of grammar), such time was given by forcing participants to wait a week before

another practice session and another week before testing measures were conducted. This was

implemented to ensure that participants were retaining learned information in long-term memory

over an extended period and not just immediately after exposure. The differences between

blocked learning and interleaving were then measured and compared between subjects after the

testing session to see which yielded better learning and memory of that learning.

Method

Participants

Level 1 and 2 headings are

used for these two section titles

Ninety-six participants with no prior Spanish experience whatsoever participated in order

to earn experimental credit for psychology classes taken at the University of California, San

Diego. Forty-one participants were randomly assigned into the blocked learning group and 47

participants were randomly assigned into the interleaved learning group. About half were native

English speakers and the remainder spoke a variety of different languages.

Design

The experiment was split into three sessions that consisted of two learning sessions

followed by a testing session. Each session was separated by exactly one week (7 days) of time.

Across both sessions, participants in the blocked and interleaved learning groups learned to

conjugate verbs in the Spanish preterite and imperfect tenses. Across both groups, assignment of

tense (preterite or imperfect) to the first or second sessions was counterbalanced, some

participants had learned the imperfect rules first and preterite rules second, while others had

learned the reverse order.

The Method section details how the study was performed. It typically details

Participants, Design, Materials, and Procedure.

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download