"Overprompting" in Programmed Instruction

Richard C. Anderson; Gerald W. Faust; Marianne C. Roderick

doi:10.1037/h0020047

"Overprompting" in Programmed Instruction

Richard C. Anderson, Gerald W. Faust, Marianne C. Roderick

Educational Psychology

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

journal abstract: 108 Ss completed either the Standard version or a Heavily-Prompted version of a 1,052-frame section of a psychology program. Half of the Ss made constructed responses while the remainder were instructed to "think" the answers that went into the blanks. As expected, those who received the Standard program scored higher on the posttest and took longer to complete the program than those who received the Heavily- Prompted version. Response mode made no difference. The results were interpreted as showing that arrangements of lesson material which permit the student to respond correctly without noticing the cue undermine performance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved). American Educational Research Association annual meeting, 1967, New York, NY, US.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	88-93
Number of pages	6
Journal	Journal of Educational Psychology
Volume	59
Issue number	2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1037/h0020047
State	Published - Apr 1968

Keywords

overprompting
programmed instruction
psychology program
response mode

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Education
Developmental and Educational Psychology

Online availability

10.1037/h0020047

Library availability

Discover UIUC Full Text

Cite this

@article{647f70a3f9fe4ae2821a86d5feebc657,

title = "{"}Overprompting{"} in Programmed Instruction",

abstract = "journal abstract: 108 Ss completed either the Standard version or a Heavily-Prompted version of a 1,052-frame section of a psychology program. Half of the Ss made constructed responses while the remainder were instructed to {"}think{"} the answers that went into the blanks. As expected, those who received the Standard program scored higher on the posttest and took longer to complete the program than those who received the Heavily- Prompted version. Response mode made no difference. The results were interpreted as showing that arrangements of lesson material which permit the student to respond correctly without noticing the cue undermine performance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved). American Educational Research Association annual meeting, 1967, New York, NY, US.",

keywords = "overprompting, programmed instruction, psychology program, response mode",

author = "Anderson, {Richard C.} and Faust, {Gerald W.} and Roderick, {Marianne C.}",

year = "1968",

month = apr,

doi = "10.1037/h0020047",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "59",

pages = "88--93",

journal = "Journal of Educational Psychology",

issn = "0022-0663",

publisher = "American Psychological Association",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - "Overprompting" in Programmed Instruction

AU - Anderson, Richard C.

AU - Faust, Gerald W.

AU - Roderick, Marianne C.

PY - 1968/4

Y1 - 1968/4

N2 - journal abstract: 108 Ss completed either the Standard version or a Heavily-Prompted version of a 1,052-frame section of a psychology program. Half of the Ss made constructed responses while the remainder were instructed to "think" the answers that went into the blanks. As expected, those who received the Standard program scored higher on the posttest and took longer to complete the program than those who received the Heavily- Prompted version. Response mode made no difference. The results were interpreted as showing that arrangements of lesson material which permit the student to respond correctly without noticing the cue undermine performance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved). American Educational Research Association annual meeting, 1967, New York, NY, US.

AB - journal abstract: 108 Ss completed either the Standard version or a Heavily-Prompted version of a 1,052-frame section of a psychology program. Half of the Ss made constructed responses while the remainder were instructed to "think" the answers that went into the blanks. As expected, those who received the Standard program scored higher on the posttest and took longer to complete the program than those who received the Heavily- Prompted version. Response mode made no difference. The results were interpreted as showing that arrangements of lesson material which permit the student to respond correctly without noticing the cue undermine performance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved). American Educational Research Association annual meeting, 1967, New York, NY, US.

KW - overprompting

KW - programmed instruction

KW - psychology program

KW - response mode

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0014277765&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0014277765&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/h0020047

DO - 10.1037/h0020047

M3 - Article

C2 - 5649622

AN - SCOPUS:0014277765

SN - 0022-0663

VL - 59

SP - 88

EP - 93

JO - Journal of Educational Psychology

JF - Journal of Educational Psychology

IS - 2

ER -

"Overprompting" in Programmed Instruction

Abstract

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Online availability

Library availability

Related links

Fingerprint

Cite this