Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Critical Discussion of Deep and Surface Processing: What It Means, How It Is Measured, the Role of Context, and Model Specification

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Educational Psychology Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The prevailing assumption by some that deep processing promotes stronger learning outcomes while surface processing promotes weaker learning outcomes has been called into question by the inconsistency and ambiguity of results in investigations of the relation between levels of processing and performance. The purpose of this literature review is to examine four areas that may be contributing to the inconsistency and ambiguity of these research results: conceptualization, operationalization, situational factors, and model specification of deep and surface processing. A PsycINFO database search was conducted, and 221 studies were identified for a comprehensive data table. Analysis of these data revealed trends that suggested conceptualization and operationalization of deep and surface processing differed depending on the theoretical frame utilized in each study. Additionally, the choice of theoretical frame also seemed to impact what situational factors may or may not have been present as well as how the model of levels of processing and performance was specified. Results from studies that met certain criteria demonstrated that levels of processing and performance are related, and further, these relations may be moderated by other factors. Implications for future research are discussed that focus on these four areas.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aaron, S., & Skakun, E. (1999). Correlation of students’ characteristics with their learning styles as they begin medical school. Academic Medicine, 74, 260–262. doi:10.1097/00001888-199903000-00016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Akerson, V. L. (2004). Learning as conceptual change: Factors mediating the development of preservice elementary teachers’ views of nature of science. Science Education, 88, 785–810. doi:10.1002/sce.10143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abraham, R. R., Kamath, A., Upadhya, S., & Ramnarayan, K. (2006). Learning approaches to physiology of undergraduates in an Indian medical school. Medical Education, 40, 916–923. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02547.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aharony, N. (2006). The use of deep and surface learning strategies among students learning English as a foreign language in an Internet environment. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 851–866. doi:10.1348/000709905X79158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albaili, M. A. (1993). Psychometric properties of the Inventory of Learning Processes: Evidence from United Arab Emirates college students. Psychological Reports, 72, 1331–1336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albaili, M. A. (1994). Learning processes and academic achievement of United Arab Emirates college students. Psychological Reports, 74, 739–746.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Emadi, A. A. (2001). The relationships among achievement, goal-orientation, and study strategies. Social Behavior and Personality, 29, 823–832. doi:10.2224/sbp.2001.29.8.823.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alesandrini, K. L., Langstaff, J. J., & Wittrock, M. C. (1984). Visual–verbal and analytic–holistic strategies, abilities, and styles. Journal of Educational Research, 77, 151–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, P. A. (1997). Mapping the multidimensional nature of domain learning: The interplay of cognitive, motivational, and strategic forces. In M. L. Maehr & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 10, pp. 213–250). Greenwich: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, P. A., Schallert, D. L., & Reynolds, R. E. (2009). What is learning anyway? A topographical perspective considered. Educational Psychologist, 44, 176–192. doi:10.1080/00461520903029006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, P. A., Dinsmore, D. L., Parkinson, M. M., & Winters, F. I. (2011). Self-regulated learning in academic domains. In B. Zimmerman & D. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ally, B. A., Gold, C. A., & Budson, A. E. (2009). An evaluation of recollection and familiarity in Alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment using receiver operating characteristics. Brain and Cognition, 69, 504–513. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2008.11.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anmarkrud, O., & Braten, I. (2009). Motivation for reading comprehension. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 252–256. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2008.09.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • APA. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arlin, M. (1986). The effects of quantity and depth of processing on children’s time perception. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 42, 84–98. doi:10.1016/0022-0965(86)90017-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arteche, A., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Ackerman, P., & Furnham, A. (2009). Typical intellectual engagement as a byproduct of openness, learning approaches, and self-assessed intelligence. Educational Psychology, 29, 357–367. doi:10.1080/01443410902927833.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aycicegi-Dinn, A., & Caldwell-Harris, C. L. (2009). Emotion-memory effects in bilingual speakers: A levels-of-processing approach. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12, 291–303. doi:10.1017/S1366728909990125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley, A. (1990). Human memory: Theory and practice. Hillside, New Jersey: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baeten, M., Dochy, F., & Struyven, K. (2008). Students’ approaches to learning and assessment preferences in a portfolio-based learning environment. Instructional Science, 36, 359–374. doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9060-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandalos, D. L., Finney, S. J., & Geske, J. A. (2003). A model of statistics performance based on achievement goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 604–616. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.3.604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barab, S. A., Thomas, M. K., & Merrill, H. (2001). Online learning: From information dissemination to fostering collaboration. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 12, 105–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnhardt, T. M., & Geraci, L. (2008). Are awareness questionnaires valid? Investigating the use of posttest questionnaires for assessing awareness in implicit memory tests. Memory & Cognition, 36, 53–64. doi:10.3758/MC.36.1.53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barton, S. B., & Sanford, A. J. (1993). A case study of anomaly detection: Shallow semantic processing and cohesion establishment. Memory & Cognition, 21, 477–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beishuizen, J. J., & Stoutjesdijk, E. T. (1999). Study strategies in a computer assisted study environment. Learning and Instruction, 9, 281–301. doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(98)00027-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beishuizen, J., Stoutjesdijk, E., & van Putten, K. (1994). Studying textbooks: Effects of learning styles, study task, and instruction. Learning and Instruction, 4, 151–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentin, S., Moscovitch, M., & Nirhod, O. (1998). Levels of processing and selective attention effects on encoding in memory. Acta Psychologica, 98, 311–341. doi:10.1016/S0001-6918(97)00048-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentley, P., Driver, J., & Dolan, R. J. (2009). Modulation of fusiform cortex activity by cholinesterase inhibition predicts effects on subsequent memory. Brain: A Journal of Neurology, 132, 2356–2371. doi:10.1093/brain/awp176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. B. (1978). Individual and group differences in study processes. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 48(3), 266–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. (1979). Individual differences in study processes and the quality of learning outcomes. Higher Education, 8, 381–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. (1987). The Study Process Questionnaire manual: Student approaches to learning and studying. Hawthorn: Australian Council for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. B. (1992). Why and how do Hong Kong students learn? Using the learning and studying process questionnaires. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University

  • Biggs, J. (1993). What do inventories of students’ learning processes really measure? A theoretical review and clarification. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(1), 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university (2nd Ed.). Berkshire, England: Open University Press.

  • Biggs, J., & Moore, P. (1993). The process of learning. Australia: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. B., Kember, D., & Leung, Y. P. (2001). The revised two factor Study Process Questionnaire: R-SPQ-2 F. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 133–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biswas, G., Leelawong, K., Schwartz, D., Vye, N., & The Teachable Agents Group at Vanderbilt. (2005). Learning by teaching: A new agent paradigm for educational software. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 19, 363–392. doi:10.1080/08839510590910200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, P. E., & Plowright, D. (2008). How postgraduate pharmacy students develop professional understanding: Re-conceptualising deep, reflective learning. Pharmacy Education, 8, 29–35. doi:10.1080/15602210701880119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blaxton, T. A. (1989). Investigating dissociations among memory measures: Support for a transfer-appropriate processing framework. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 657–668.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Block, R. A. (2009). Intent to remember briefly presented human faces and toher pictorial stimuli enhances recognition memory. Memory & Cognition, 37, 667–678. doi:10.3758/MC.37.5.667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blom, S., & Severiens, S. (2008). Engagement in self-regulated deep learning of successful immigrant and non-immigrant students in inner city schools. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 23, 41–58. doi:10.1007/BF03173139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumberg, P. (2000). Evaluating the evidence that problem-based learners are self-directed learners: A review of the literature. In D. H. Evenson & C. E. Hmelo (Eds.), Problem-based learning: A research perspective on learning interactions. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boatright-Horowitz, S. L., Langley, M., & Gunnip, M. (2009). Depth-of-processing effects as college students use academic advising web sites. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12, 331–335. doi:10.1089/cpb.2008.0207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boekaerts, M. (2002). Assessment of attitudes about new learners’ roles: Factor analysis of the Beliefs about Working in Groups Questionnaire. Psychological Reports, 90, 986–996. doi:10.2466/PR0.90.3.986-996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boldini, A., Russo, R., & Avons, S. E. (2004). One process is not enough! A speed-accuracy tradeoff study of recognition memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 353–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, B. D., & Ellis, N. R. (1986). Levels of processing and memory in mentally retarded and nonretarded persons. Intelligence, 10, 1–8. doi:10.1016/0160-2896(86)90024-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyle, E. A., Duffy, T., & Dunleavy, K. (2003). Learning styles and academic outcome: The validity and utility of Vermunt’s inventory of learning styles in a British higher education setting. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 267–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brébion, G., Amador, X., Smith, M. J., & Gorman, J. M. (1997). Mechanisms underlying memory impairment in schizophrenia. Psychological Medicine, 27, 383–393. doi:10.1017/S0033291796004448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M. B., Aoshima, M., Bolen, L. M., Chia, R., & Kohyama, T. (2007). Cross-cultural learning approaches in students from the USA, Japan and Taiwan. School Psychology International, 28, 592–604. doi:10.1177/0143034307085660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryceson, K. (2007). The online learning environment - A new model using social constructivism and the concept of ‘Ba’ as a theoretical framework. Learning Environments Research, 10, 189–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, M. C. R., & Weaver, G. E. (2003). Interest and attention in facial recognition. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 96, 467–480. doi:10.2466/PMS.96.2.467-480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camp, C. J., Markley, R. P., & Kramer, J. J. (1983). Spontaneous use of mnemonics by elderly individuals. Educational Gerontology, 9, 57–71. doi:10.1080/0380127830090106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J., Smith, D., Boulton-Lewis, G., Brownlee, J., Burnett, P. C., Carrington, S., & Purdie, N. (2001). Students’ perceptions of teaching and learning: The influence of students’ approaches to learning and teachers’ approaches to teaching. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 7, 173–187. doi:10.1080/13540600120054964.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cano, F. (2007). Approaches to learning and study orchestrations in high school students. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 22, 131–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, R. (1997). Cognitive dispositions and nurses’ appraisals of their learning environment. Issues in Educational Research, 7, 19–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, R. H., & Millard, Y. (1994). The relationship between approach to learning and learning strategies in learning music. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 64, 45–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrier, L. M. (2003). College students’ choice of study strategies. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 96, 54–56. doi:10.2466/PMS.96.1.54-56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cassidy, S. (2007). Assessing ‘inexperienced’ students’ ability to self-assess: Exploring links with learning style and academic personal control. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32, 313–330. doi:10.1080/02602930600896704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cassidy, S., & Eachus, P. (2000). Learning style, academic belief systems, self-report student proficiency and academic achievement in higher education. Educational Psychology, 20, 307–320. doi:10.1080/713663740.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cerdán, R., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2008). The effects of tasks on integrating information from multiple documents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 209–222. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Challis, B. H., Velichkovsky, B. M., & Craik, F. I. M. (1996). Levels-of-processing effects on a variety of memory tasks: New findings and theoretical implications. Consciousness and Cognition, 5, 142–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2008). Personality, intelligence and approaches to learning as predictors of academic performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1596–1603. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.01.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2009). Mainly openess: The relationship between the Big Five personality traits and learning approaches. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 524–529. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2009.06.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Furnham, A., & Lewis, M. (2007). Personality and approaches to learning predict preference for different teaching methods. Learning and Individual Differences, 17, 241–250. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2006.12.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, K.-E., Sung, Y.-T., & Chen, I.-D. (2002). The effect of concept mapping to enhance text comprehension and summarization. Journal of Experimental Education, 71, 5–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, C.-M., Lin, W.-Y., & Tsai, C.-S. (2008). Conscious and unconscious forms of memory in different implicit tests. Cognitive Systems Research, 9, 312–328. doi:10.1016/j.cogsys.2008.05.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1980). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clump, M. A. (2005). Changes to students’ learning processes following instruction on the topic. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 32, 293–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clump, M. A., & Skogsberg, K. (2003). Differences in learning styles of college students attending similar universities in different geographic locations. College Student Journal, 37, 501–508.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale: Erlbaum and Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corson, Y., Verrier, N., & Bucic, A. (2009). False memories and individual variations: The role of field dependence-independence. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 8–11. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2009.01.036.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cotton, D. R. E., & Gresty, K. A. (2007). The rhetoric and reality of e-learning: Using the think-aloud method to evaluate an online resource. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32, 583–600. doi:10.1080/02602930601116920.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coutinho, S. A., & Neuman, G. (2008). A model of metacognition, achievement goal orientation, learning style and self-efficacy. Learning Environments Research, 11, 131–151. doi:10.1007/s10984-008-9042-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coyne, M. D., McCoach, D. B., & Kapp, S. (2007). Vocabulary intervention for kindergarten students: Comparing extended instruction to embedded instruction and incidental exposure. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30, 74–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craig, M. C., Fletcher, P. C., Daly, E. M., Rymer, J., Cutter, W. J., Brammer, M., & Murphy, D. G. M. (2007). Gonadotropin hormone releasing hormone agonists alter prefrontal function during verbal encoding in young women. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 32, 1116–1127. doi:10.1016/j.psyneuen.2007.09.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 11, 671–684. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craik, F. I. M., & Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 104, 268–294. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Orlando: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J. (1971). Validity. In R. L. Thorndike (Ed.), Educational measurement (pp. 443–507). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutica, I., & Bucciarelli, M. (2008). The deep versus the shallow: Effects of co-speech gestures in learning from discourse. Cognitive Science: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 32, 921–935. doi:10.1080/03640210802222039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daselaar, S. M., Veltman, D. J., Rombouts, S. A. R. B., Raaijmakers, J. G. W., & Jonker, C. (2003). Deep processing activates the medial temporal lobe in young but not in old adults. Neurobiology in Aging, 24, 1005–1011. doi:10.1016/S0197-4580(03)00032-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • deVries, P., & Downie, N. (2000). Ensuring depth of learning in hospitality management programmes - Putting a method into practice. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 19, 385–397. doi:10.1016/S0278-4319(00)00032-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dinsmore, D. L., Alexander, P. A., & Loughlin, S. M. (2008). Focusing the conceptual lens on metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 20, 391–409. doi:10.1007/s10648-008-9083-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dixon, R. A., & von Eye, A. (1984). Depth of processing and text recall in adulthood. Journal of Reading Behavior, 16, 109–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elander, J. (2003). A discipline-based undergraduate skills module. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 3, 48–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elliot, A. J., McGregor, H. A., & Gable, S. (1999). Achievement goals, study strategies, and exam performance: A mediational analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 549–563. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.91.3.549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Entwistle, N. J. (1977). Strategies of learning and studying: Recent research findings. British Journal of Educational Studies, 25, 225–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Entwistle, N. (1988). Styles of learning and teaching. London: David Fulton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Entwistle, N. J. (1997). Reconstructing approaches to learning: A response to Webb. Higher Education, 33, 213–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Entwistle, N. (2000). Promoting deep learning through teaching and assessment: Conceptual frameworks and educational contexts. Paper presented at the TLRP Conference, Leicester (www.ed.ac.uk/etl/publications.html).

  • Entwistle, N. (2001). Promoting deep learning through teaching and assessment. In L. Suskie (Ed.), Assessment to promote deep learning: Insights from AAHE’s 2000 and 1999 assessment conferences (pp. 9–19). American Association for Higher Education.

  • Entwistle, N. J., & Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding student learning. London: Croom Helm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, C., & Gibbons, N. J. (2007). The interactivity effect in multimedia learning. Computers & Education, 49, 1147–1160. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2006.01.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, B., & Honour, L. (1997). Getting inside knowledge: The application of Entwistle’s model of surface/deep processing in producing open learning materials. Educational Psychology, 17, 127–139. doi:10.1080/0144341970170109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fenollar, P., Román, S., & Cuestas, P. J. (2007). University students’ academic performance: An integrative conceptual framework and empirical analysis. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 873–891. doi:10.1348/000709907X189118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson-Hessler, M. G., & de Jong, T. (1990). Studying physics texts: Differences in study processes between good and poor performers. Cognition and Instruction, 7, 41–54. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci0701_2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferm, C., & Johansen, G. (2008). Professors’ and trainees’ perceptions of educational quality as related to preconditions of deep learning in musikdidaktik. British Journal of Music Education, 25, 177–191. doi:10.1017/S0265051708007912.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freed, D. B., Marshall, R. C., & Phillips, D. S. (1998). Comparison of semantically and phonemically based training procedures in an overlearned naming task. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 87, 795–800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, M. (1995). Peer assessment by groups of group work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 20, 289–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Froger, C., Taconnat, L., Landré, L., Beigneux, K., & Isingrini, M. (2008). Effects of level of processing at encoding and types of retrieval task in mild cognitive impairment and normal aging. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 31, 312–321. doi:10.1080/13803390802112554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fujii, T., Okuda, J., Tsukiura, T., Ohtake, H., Suzuki, M., Kawashima, R., Itoh, M., Fukuda, H., & Yamadori, A. (2002). Encoding-related brain activity during deep processing of verbal materials: A PET study. Neuroscience Research, 44, 429–438. doi:10.1016/S0168-0102(02)00160-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furnham, A., Christopher, A., Garwood, J., & Martin, N. G. (2008). Ability, demography, learning style, and personality trait correlates of student preference for assessment method. Educational Psychology, 28, 15–27. doi:10.1080/01443410701369138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gadzella, B. M., & Baloglu, M. (2003). High and low achieving education students on processing, retaining, and retrieval of information. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 30, 99–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gadzella, B. M., & Masten, W. G. (1998). Critical thinking and learning processes for students in two major fields. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 25, 256–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gadzella, B. M., Ginther, D. W., & Williamson, J. D. (1986). Differences in learning processes and academic achievement. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 62, 151–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gadzella, B. M., Ginther, D. W., & Williamson, J. D. (1987). Study skills, learning processes and academic achievement. Psychological Reports, 61, 167–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gadzella, B. M., Ginther, D. W., & Bryant, G. W. (1997a). Prediction of performance in an academic course by scores on measures of learning style and critical thinking. Psychological Reports, 81, 595–602.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gadzella, B. M., Ginther, D. W., Masten, W. G., & Guthrie, D. (1997b). Predicting students as deep and shallow processors of information. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 84, 875–881.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gadzella, B. M., Masten, W. G., & Stacks, J. (1998). Students’ stress and their learning strategies, test anxiety, and attributions. College Student Journal, 32, 416–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gadzella, B. M., Stephens, R., & Baloglu, M. (2002). Prediction of educational psychology course grades by age and learning style scores. College Student Journal, 36, 62–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gadzella, B. M., Masten, W. G., & Zascavage, V. (2009). Differences among three groups of men on stress and learning processes. Individual Differences Research, 7, 29–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallo, D. A., Meadow, N. G., Johnson, E. L., & Foster, K. T. (2008). Deep levels of processing elicit a distinctiveness heuristic: Evidence from the criterial recollection task. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 1095–1111. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geva, E., & Ryan, E. B. (1985). Use of conjunctions in expository texts by skilled and less skilled readers. Journal of Reading Behavior, 17, 331–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, G. (1992). Improving quality of learning. Bristol: Technical and Educational Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, G. R. (1999). Learning how to learn using a virtual learning environment for philosophy. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 15, 221–231. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2729.1999.153096.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J. M. (2004). Priming problem solving with conceptual processing of relevant objects. Journal of General Psychology, 131, 118–135. doi:10.3200/GENP.131.2.118-135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, J. D. G. (2005). Student teacher’s learning about child sexual abuse strategies for primary school: An exploratory study of surface and deep learning. Sex Education, 5, 79–92. doi:10.1080/1468181042000301902.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grady, C. L., McIntosh, A. R., Rajah, M. N., Beig, S., & Craik, F. I. M. (1999). The effects of age on the neural correlates of episodic encoding. Cerebral Cortex, 9, 805–814. doi:10.1093/cercor/9.8.805.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101, 371–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., & Golan, S. (1991). Motivational influences on cognition: Task involvement, ego involvement, and depth of information processing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 187–194. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.83.2.187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, B. A., & Miller, R. B. (1996). Influences on achievement: Goals, perceived ability, and cognitive engagement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 181–192. doi:10.1006/ceps.1996.0015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grodsky, A., & Giambra, L. M. (1990). The consistency across vigilance and reading tasks of individual differences in the occurrence of task-unrelated and task-related images and thoughts. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 10, 39–52. doi:10.2190/6QG5-CXVV-4XUR-7P3K.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grosschalk, M. J., & Gregg, V. H. (1996). Relaxation and cognitive processing during memory retrieval. Contemporary Hypnosis, 13, 177–185. doi:10.1002/ch.66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groves, M. (2005). Problem-based learning and learning approach: Is there a relationship? Advances in Health Sciences Education, 10, 315–326. doi:10.1007/s10459-005-8556-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, T. E., Stock, W. A., Kulhavy, R. W., & Swindell, L. K. (1996). Gender and developmental differences in the academic study behaviors of elementary school children. Journal of Experimental Education, 65, 18–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hara, N., Bonk, C. J., & Angeli, C. (2000). Content analysis of online discussion in an applied educational psychology course. Instructional Science, 28, 115–152. doi:10.1023/A:1003764722829.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heijne-Penninga, M., Kuks, J. B. M., Hofman, W. H. A., & Cohen-Schotanus, J. (2008). Influence of open- and closed-book tests on medical students’ learning approaches. Medical Education, 42, 967–974. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2008.03125.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henry, K. J., Van Lunen, B. L., Udermann, B., & Onate, J. A. (2009). Curricular satisfaction levels of national athletic trainers’ association-accredited postprofessional athletic training graduates. Journal of Athletic Training, 44, 391–399. doi:10.4085/1062-6050-44.4.391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henson, R. N. A., Hornberger, M., & Rugg, M. D. (2005). Further dissociating the processes involved in recognition memory: An fMRI study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 1058–1073. doi:10.1162/0898929054475208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, J., & Woodland, W. (2002). An evaluation of foreign fieldwork in promoting deep learning: A preliminary investigation. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27, 539–555. doi:10.1080/0260293022000020309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hilliard, R. I. (1995). How do medical students learn: Medical student learning styles and factors that affect these learning styles. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 7, 201–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinojosa, J. A., Martín-Loeches, M., Muñoz, F., Casado, P., & Pozo, M. A. (2004). Electrophysiological evidence of automatic early semantic processing. Brain and Language, 88, 39–46. doi:10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00158-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Igo, L. B., Riccomini, P. J., Bruning, R. H., & Pope, G. G. (2006). How should middle-school students with LD approach online note taking? A mixed-methods study. Learning Disability Quarterly, 29, 89–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, L. L. (1983). Perceptual enhancement: Persistence effects of an experience. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, 21–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, L. L., & Dallas, M. (1981). On the relationship between autobiographical memory and perceptual learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 3, 306–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jakoubek, J., & Swenson, R. R. (1993). Differences in use of learning strategies and relation to grades among undergraduate students. Psychological Reports, 73, 787–793.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, P. (1998). Progressive development of deep learning skills through undergraduate and postgraduate dissertations. Educational Studies, 24, 95–105. doi:10.1080/0305569980240107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jay, T., Caldwell-Harris, C., & King, K. (2008). Recalling taboo and nontaboo words. American Journal of Psychology, 121, 83–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jundt, D. K., & Hinsz, V. B. (2002). Influences of positive and negative affect on decisions involving judgmental biases. Social Behavior and Personality, 30, 45–52. doi:10.2224/sbp.2002.30.1.45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Justicia, F., Pichardo, M. C., Cano, F., Berbén, A. B. G., & De la Fuente, J. (2008). The Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2 F): Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses at item level. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 23, 355–372. doi:10.1007/BF03173004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamsteeg, P. A. (1992). Viewpoints in domain representations: A proposal for description and formalization. In H. Kratz (Ed.), Proceedings of the Seventh Canadian Symposium on Instructional Technology. Canadian Association of Course-ware Producers: Alberta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirby, J. R., & Pedwell, D. (1991). Students’ approaches to summarisation. Educational Psychology, 11, 297–307. doi:10.1080/0144341910110306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, A. M., Zwickel, J., Prinz, W., & Frith, U. (2009). Animated triangles: An eye tracking investigation. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1189–1197. doi:10.1080/17470210802384214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klinger, T. H. (2006). Learning approach, thinking style and critical inquiry: The online community. Korean Journal of Thinking & Problem Solving, 16, 91–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koivukari, A. M. (1987). Question level and cognitive processing: Psycholinguistic dimensions of questions and answers. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 101–120. doi:10.1017/S0142716400000151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozminsky, E., & Kaufman, G. (1992). Academic achievement and individual differences in the learning processes of Israeli high-school students. Learning and Individual Differences, 4, 335–345. doi:10.1016/1041-6080(92)90018-A.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lau, S., Liem, A. D., & Nie, Y. (2008). Task- and self-related pathways to deep learning: The mediating role of achievement goals, classroom attentiveness, and group participation. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 639–662. doi:10.1348/000709907X270261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leelawong, K., & Biswas, G. (2008). Designing learning by teaching agents: The Betty’s Brain system. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 18, 181–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehman, S., & Schraw, G. (2002). Effects of coherence and relevance on shallow and deep text processing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 738–750. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.4.738.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liem, A. D., Lau, S., & Nie, Y. (2008). The role of self-efficacy, task value, and achievement goals in predicting learning strategies, task disengagement, peer relationship, and achievement outcome. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 486–512. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.08.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockhart, R. S., & Craik, F. I. M. (1990). Levels of processing: A retrospective commentary on a framework for memory research. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 44, 87–112. doi:10.1037/h0084237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockhart, D., & Schmeck, R. R. (1983). Learning styles and classroom evaluation methods: Different strokes for different folks. College Student Journal, 17, 94–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maheswaran, D., & Meyers-Levy, J. (1990). The influence of message framing and issue involvement. Journal of Marketing Research, 27, 361–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Major, J. C., & Horton, K. D. (2008). Measuring automatic retrieval in a conceptual priming task. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 20, 1027–1042. doi:10.1080/09541440701862190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marinkovic, K., Oscar-Berman, M., Urban, T., O’Reilly, C. E., Howard, J. A., Sawyer, K., & Harris, G. J. (2009). Alcoholism and dampened temporal limbic activation to emotional faces. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 33, 1880–1892. doi:10.1111/j.1530-0277.2009.01026.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, I. G., Stark, P., & Jolly, B. (2000). Benefiting from clinical experience: The influence of learning style and clinical experience on performance in an undergraduate objective structured clinical examination. Medical Education, 34, 530–534. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2923.2000.00489.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976a). On qualitative differences in learning: I. Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(1), 4–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976b). On qualitative differences in learning: II. Outcome as a function of the learner’s conception of the task. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(2), 115–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1997). Approaches to learning. In F. Marton, D. J. Hounsell, & N. J. Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning (2nd ed., pp. 39–58). Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., Hounsell, D., & Entwistle, N. (1984). The experience of learning. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, B., Lietz, P., & Darmawan, I. G. N. (2007). Values and learning approaches of students at an international university. Social Psychology of Education, 10, 247–275. doi:10.1007/s11218-007-9019-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maylor, E. A., Rabbitt, P. M., & Kingstone, A. (1987). Effects of alcohol on word categorization and recognition memory. British Journal of Psychology, 78, 233–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, P. R., & Meier, S. (1983). Effects of race and psychological variables on college student writing. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 10, 148–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClain, L. (1983). Interval estimation: Effect of processing demands on prospective and retrospective reports. Perception & Psychophysics, 34, 185–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKelvie, S. J., & Pullara, M. (1988). Effects of hypnosis and level of processing on repeated recall of line drawings. Journal of General Psychology, 115, 315–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKeown, M. G., & Beck, I. L. (2004). Direct and rich vocabulary instruction. In J. F. Baumann & E. J. Kame’enui (Eds.), Vocabulary instruction: Research to practice (pp. 13–27). New York: Guilford Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin, K., & Mandin, H. (2002). Using ‘concept sorting’ to study learning processes and outcomes. Academic Medicine, 77, 831–836. doi:10.1097/00001888-200208000-00017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McParland, M., Noble, L. M., & Livingston, G. (2004). The effectiveness of problem-based learning compared to traditional teaching in undergraduate psychiatry. Medical Education, 38(8), 859–867. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.01818.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meehan, E. F., & Pilotti, M. (1996). Auditory priming in an implicit memory task that emphasizes surface processing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 495–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, S. T., & Schmeck, R. R. (1985). The burned-out college student: A descriptive profile. Journal of College Student Personnel, 26, 63–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meier, S. T., McCarthy, P. R., & Schmeck, R. R. (1984). Validity of self-efficacy as a predictor of writing performance. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 8, 107–120. doi:10.1007/BF01173038.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meijer, W. A., de Groot, R. H. M., van Gervan, P. W. M., van Boxtel, M. P. J., & Jolles, J. (2009). Level of processing and reaction time in young and middle-aged adults and the effect of education. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 21, 216–234. doi:10.1080/09541440802091780.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messick, S. (1981). Constructs and their vicissitudes in educational and psychological measurement. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 575–588. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.89.3.575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50, 741–749. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.50.9.741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, C. D., Alway, M., & McKinley, D. L. (1987). Effects of learning styles and strategies on academic success. Journal of College Student Personnel, 28, 399–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mills, P. (2003). Group project work with undergraduate veterinary science students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28, 527–538. doi:10.1080/02602930301676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minasian-Batmanian, L. C., Lingard, J., & Prosser, M. (2005). Differences in students’ perceptions of learning compulsory foundation biochemistry in the health sciences professions. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 10, 279–290. doi:10.1007/s10459-005-1404-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2000). Engaging students in active learning: The case for personalized multimedia messages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 724–733. doi:10.1037/0022-06M.92.4.724.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muis, K. R. (2007). The role of epistemic beliefs in self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 42(3), 173–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, P. K., & Alexander, P. A. (2000). A motivated exploration of motivation terminology. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 3–53. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, P. K., & Alexander, P. A. (2002). What counts? The predictive powers of subject-matter knowledge, strategic processing, and interest in domain-specific performance. The Journal of Experimental Education, 70, 197–214. doi:10.1080/00220970209599506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, S. M., & Tyler, S. (2005). The relationship between learning approaches to part-time study of management courses and transfer of learning to the workplace. Educational Psychology, 25, 455–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthukrishna, N., & Borkowski, J. G. (1995). How learning contexts facilitate strategy transfer. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 425–446. doi:10.1002/acp.2350090506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nairne, J. S., Pandeirada, J. N. S., & Thompson, S. R. (2008). Adaptive memory: The comparative value of survival processing. Psychological Science, 19, 176–180. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02064.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nathanson, A. I., & Botta, R. A. (2003). Shaping the effects of television on adolescents’ body image disturbance: The role of parental mediation. Communication Research, 30, 304–331. doi:10.1177/0093650203030003003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, T. O. (1977). Repetition and depth of processing. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 16, 151–171. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(77)80044-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuville, S., Frenay, M., & Bourgeois, E. (2007). Task value, self-efficacy and goal orientations: Impact on self-regulated learning, choice and performance among university students. Psychologica Belgica, 47, 95–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols, J. D. (1996). The effects of cooperative learning on student achievement and motivation in a high school geometry class. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 467–476. doi:10.1006/ceps.1996.0031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nijhuis, J. F. H., Segers, M. S. R., & Gijselaers, W. H. (2005). Influence of redesigning a learning environment on student perceptions and learning strategies. Learning Environments Research, 8, 67–93. doi:10.1007/s10984-005-7950-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nijhuis, J., Segers, M., & Gijselaers, W. (2008). The extent of variability in learning strategies and students’ perceptions of the learning environment. Learning and Instruction, 18, 121–134. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.01.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niles, S. (1996). Cultural variation in learning strategies: A comparison of Australian and Sri Lankan university students. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 130, 83–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • N’Kaoua, B., Véron, A.-L. H., Lespinet, V. C., Claverie, B., & Sztark, F. (2002). Time course of cognitive recovery after propofol anaesthesia: A level of processing approach. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 24, 713–719. doi:10.1076/jcen.24.6.713.8401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nolen, S. B. (1988). Reasons for studying: Motivational orientations and study strategies. Cognition and Instruction, 5, 269–287. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci0504_2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nolen, S. B., & Haladyna, T. M. (1990a). Personal and environmental influences on students’ beliefs about effective study strategies. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 15, 116–130. doi:10.1016/0361-476X(90)90011-O.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nolen, S. B., & Haladyna, T. M. (1990b). Motivation and studying in high school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 115–126. doi:10.1002/tea.3660270204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novick, L. R. (1988). Analogical transfer, problem similarity, and expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning. Memory, and Cognition, 14, 510–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien, E. M., & Hart, S. J. (1999). Action learning: The link between academia and industry? Educational Research, 41, 77–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onion, C. W. R., & Bartzokas, C. A. (1998). Changing attitudes to infection management in primary care: A controlled trial of active versus passive guideline implementation strategies. Family Practice, 15, 99–104. doi:10.1093/fampra/15.2.99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osorio, A., Ballesteros, S., Fay, S., & Pouthas, V. (2009). The effect of age on word-stem cued recall: A behavioral and electrophysiological study. Brain Research, 1289, 56–68. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2009.07.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oulasvirta, A., Kärkkäinen, L., & Laarni, J. (2005). Expectations and memory in link search. Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 773–789. doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(04)00035-4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papinczak, T., Young, L., Groves, M., & Haynes, M. (2008). Effects of a metacognitive intervention on students’ approaches to learning and self-efficacy in a first year medical course. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 13, 213–232. doi:10.1007/s10459-006-9036-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, G., & Lee, G. (2009). Viva voce (oral examination) as an assessment method: Insights from marketing students. Journal of Marketing Education, 31, 120–130. doi:10.1177/0273475309334050.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedhazur, E. J. (1997). Multiple regression in behavioral research: Explanation and prediction. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phan, H. P. (2006). Examination of student learning approaches, reflective thinking, and epistemological beliefs: A latent variables approach. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 10(4), 577–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phan, H. P. (2007). An examination of reflective thinking, learning approaches, and self-efficacy beliefs at the University of the South Pacific: A path analysis approach. Educational Psychology, 27, 789–806. doi:10.1080/01443410701349809.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phan, H. P. (2008). Unifying different theories of learning: Theoretical framework and empirical evidence. Educational Psychology, 28, 325–340. doi:10.1080/01443410701591392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phan, H. P. (2009a). Amalgamation of future time orientation, epistemological beliefs, achievement goals and study strategies: Empirical evidence established. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 155–173. doi:10.1348/000709908X306864.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phan, H. P. (2009b). Exploring students’ reflective thinking practice, deep processing strategies, effort, and achievement goal orientations. Educational Psychology, 297–313. doi:10.1080/01443410902877988.

  • Phan, H. P. (2009c). Relationships between goals, self-efficacy, critical thinking and deep processing strategies: A path analysis. Educational Psychology, 29, 777–799. doi:10.1080/01443410903289423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phan, H. P., & Deo, B. (2006). Approaches to learning in Educational Psychology and Mathematics: A comparative analysis in the South Pacific region. Presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE) Conference. South Australia.

  • Pierce, B. H., Sullivan, A. L., Schacter, D. L., & Budson, A. E. (2005). Comparing source-based and gist-based false recognition in aging and Alzheimer’s disease. Neuropsychology, 19, 411–419. doi:10.1037/0894-4105.19.4.411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451–502). San Diego: Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R., & Schrauben, B. (1992). Students’ motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement on classroom tasks. In D. H. Schunk & J. Meece (Eds.), Students perceptions in the classroom: Causes and consequences (pp. 149–183). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitts, M., & Heap, M. (1996). Memory and depth of processing in ‘hypnotized’ and ‘non-hypnotized’ subjects. Contemporary Hypnosis, 13, 129–136. doi:10.1002/ch.60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K. R. (1994). The myth of the framework: In defence of science and rationality. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, S., Tindal, I., & Millwood, R. (2008). Personalized learning and the ultraversity experience. Interactive Learning Environments, 16, 63–81. doi:10.1080/10494820701772710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding learning and teaching: The experience in higher education. Buckingham, England: Open University Press.

  • Ragland, J. D., McCarthy, E., Bilker, W. B., Brensinger, C. M., Valdez, J., Kohler, C., Gur, R. E., & Gur, R. C. (2006). Levels-of-processing effect on internal source monitoring in schizophrenia. Psychological Medicine, 36, 641–648. doi:10.1017/S0033291706007094.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsden, P. (1988). Improving learning: New perspectives. London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in higher education. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to teach in higher education. London: Routledge.

  • Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, A. G., & Fergus, E. E. (1993). Learning style and ability grouping in the high school system: Some Caribbean findings. Educational Research, 35, 69–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez, C. M. (2009). The impact of academic self-concept, expectations and the choice of learning strategy on academic achievement: The case of business students. Higher Education Research & Development, 28, 523–539. doi:10.1080/07294360903146841.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Royet, J.-P., Koenig, O., Paugam-Moisy, H., Puzenat, D., & Chasse, J.-L. (2004). Levels-of-processing effects on a task of olfactory naming. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 98, 197–213. doi:10.2466/PMS.98.1.197-213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salovaara, H. (2005). An exploration of students’ strategy use in inquiry-based computer-supported collaborative learning. Journal of Educational Studies, 25, 225–237. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2005.00112.x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez, E., Garcia-Rodicio, H., & Acuna, S. R. (2009). Are instructional explanations more effctive in the context of an impasse? Instructional Science, 37, 537–563. doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9074-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandberg, J., & Barnard, Y. (1997). Deep learning is difficult. Instructional Science, 25, 15–36. doi:10.1023/A:1002941804556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandman, C. A. (1993). Memory rehabilitation in Alzheimer’s disease: Preliminary findings. Clinical Gerontologist: The Journal of Aging and Mental Health, 13, 19–33. doi:10.1300/J018v13n04_03.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sauzéon, H., N’kaoua, B., Lespinet, V., Guillem, F., & Claverie, B. (2000). Age effect in recall performance according to the levels of processing, elaboration, and retrieval cues. Experimental Aging Research, 26, 57–73. doi:10.1080/036107300243687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schommer, M., & Surber, J. R. (1986). Comprehension-monitoring failure in skilled adult readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 353–357. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.78.5.353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. H. (2008). Metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning: Research recommendations. Educational Psychology Review, 20, 463–467. doi:10.1007/s10648-008-9086-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scouller, K. (1998). The influence of assessment method on students’ learning approaches: Multiple choice question examination versus assignment essay. Higher Education, 35, 453–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sedikides, C., & Green, J. D. (2000). On the self-protective nature of inconsistency-negativity management: Using the person memory paradigm to examine self-referent memory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 906–922. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Segalowitz, N., Cohen, P., Chan, A., & Prieur, T. (2001). Musical recall memory: Contributions of elaboration and depth of processing. Psychology of Music, 29, 139–148. doi:10.1177/0305735601292004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senko, C., & Miles, K. M. (2008). Pursuing their own learning agenda: How mastery-oriented students jeopardize their class performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 561–583. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.12.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • She, H.-C., & Chen, Y.-Z. (2009). The impact of multimedia effect on science learning: Evidence from eye movements. Computers & Education, 53, 1297–1307. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.06.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shell, D. F., & Husman, J. (2008). Control, motivation, affect, and strategic self-regulation in the college classroom: A multidimensional phenomenon. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 443–459. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shen, L., & Dillard, J. P. (2009). Message frames interact with motivational systems to determine depth of message processing. Health Communication, 24, 504–514. doi:10.1080/10410230903104897.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shen, J., Hiltz, S. R., & Bieber, M. (2008). Learning strategies in online collaborative examinations. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 51, 63–78. doi:10.1109/TPC.2007.2000053.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shimamura, A. P. (1986). Priming effects in amnesia: Evidence for a dissociable memory function. [Special Issue: Human memory]. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 38, 619–694.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shum, D., Sweeper, S., & Murray, R. (1996). Performance on verbal implicit and explicit memory tasks following traumatic brain injury. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 11, 43–53. doi:10.1097/00001199-199604000-00005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silberman, E. K., Weingartner, H., Laraia, M., Byrnes, S., & Post, R. M. (1983). Processing of emotional properties of stimuli by depressed and normal subjects. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 171, 10–14. doi:10.1097/00005053-198301000-00003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, A. F., Fagley, N. S., & Halleran, J. G. (2004). Decision framing: Moderating effects of individual differences and cognitive processing. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 17, 77–93. doi:10.1002/bdm.463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinha, S. P., & Kumari, P. (2001). Parental inducement of self-regulation, strategy use and attribution of success/failure among school children. Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology, 27, 169–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sins, P. H. M., van Joolingen, W. R., Savelsbergh, E. R., & van Hout-Wolters, B. (2008). Motivation and performance within a collaborative computer-based modeling task: Relations between students’ achievement goal orientation, self-efficacy, cognitive processing, and achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 58–77. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.12.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sitthiworachart, J., & Joy, M. (2008). Computer support of effective peer assessment in an undergraduate programming class. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 217–231. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00255.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skaggs, L. P., Rocklin, T. R., Dansereau, D. F., & Hall, R. H. (1990). Dyadic learning of technical material: Individual differences, social interaction, and recall. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 15, 47–63. doi:10.1016/0361-476X(90)90005-L.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, S. M., Tindell, D. R., Pierce, B. H., Gilliland, T. R., & Gerkens, D. R. (2001). The use of source memory to identity one’s own episodic confusion errors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 362–374. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.27.2.362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K., Clegg, S., Lawrence, E., & Todd, M. J. (2007). The challenges of reflection: Students learning from work placements. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44, 131–141. doi:10.1080/14703290701241042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sporer, S. L. (1991). Deep—deeper—deepest? Encoding strategies and the recognition of human faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 323–333. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.17.2.323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, A. J., Holler, J., & Kidd, E. (2007). Shallow processing of ambiguous pronouns: Evidence for delay. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 1680–1696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, Y. M., & Cantwell, R. H. (1999). The planning behaviours of musicians engaging traditional and non-traditional scores. Psychology of Music, 27, 245–266. doi:10.1177/0305735699272017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tait, H., & Entwistle, N. J. (1996). Identifying students at risk through ineffective study strategies. Higher Education, 31, 97–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tehan, G., Fallon, A. B., & Randall, N. (1997). The effect of item and relational processing on incidental long-term memory for order. Memory, 5, 457–482. doi:10.1080/741941431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terry, R. L. (1993). How wearing eyeglasses affects facial recognition. Current Psychology, 12, 151–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thill, E. E., & Brunel, P. (1995). Ego-involvement and task-involvement: Related conceptions of ability, effort, and learning strategies among soccer players. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 26, 81–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, C. R., & Gadbois, S. A. (2007). Academic self-handicapping: The role of self-clarity and students’ learning strategies. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 101–119. doi:10.1348/000709905X79644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thorndike, E. L., & Gates, A. I. (1929). Elementary principles of education. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tian, X. (2007). Do assessment methods matter? A sensitivity test. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32, 387–401. doi:10.1080/02602930600898460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toichi, M., & Kamio, Y. (2002). Long-term memory and levels-of-processing in autism. Neuropsychologia, 40, 964–969. doi:10.1016/S0028-3932(01)00163-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tooth, D., Tonge, K., & McManus, I. C. (1989). Anxiety and study methods in preclinical students: Causal relation to examination performance. Medical Education, 23, 416–421. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.1989.tb00896.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toppino, T. C., Fearnow-Kenney, M. D., Kiepert, M. H., & Teremula, A. C. (2009). The spacing effect in intentional and incidental free recall by children and adults: Limits on the automaticity hypothesis. Memory & Cognition, 37, 316–325. doi:10.3758/MC.37.3.316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tulving, E., & Schacter, D. L. (1990). Priming and human memory systems. Science, 247, 301–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Upton, D., & Adams, S. (2006). Individual differences in online learning. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 5, 141–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaid, J. (1987). Visual field asymmetries for rhyme and syntactic category judgments in monolinguals and fluent early and late bilinguals. Brain and Language, 30, 263–277. doi:10.1016/0093-934X(87)90102-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van den Broek, P., Risden, K., & Husebye-Hartmann, E. (1995). The role of readers’ standards for coherence in the generation of inferences during reading. In R. F. Lorch & E. J. O’Brien (Eds.), Sources of coherence in reading (pp. 353–374). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Sheldon, K. M., & Deci, E. L. (2004). Motivating learning, performance, and persistence: The synergistic effects of intrinsic goal contents and autonomy-supportive contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 246–260. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verheij, J., Stoutjesdijk, E., & Beishuizen, J. (1996). Search and study strategies in hypertext. Computers in Human Behavior, 12, 1–15. doi:10.1016/0747-5632(95)00015-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verma, B. P. (1994). Hemisphericity and learning styles among students of distance education. Indian Journal of Psychometry & Education, 25, 53–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verma, S. B. (2000). Cognitive and regulation strategies of learning among distance learners. Psycho-Lingua, 30, 43–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vermetten, Y. J., Lodewijks, H. G., & Vermunt, J. D. (2001). The role of personality traits and goal orientations in strategy use. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 149–170. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vermunt, J. D. H. M., & Van Rijswijk, F. A. W. M. (1988). Analysis and development of students’ skill in self-regulated learning. Higher Education, 17, 647–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vidal-Abarca, E., Martinez, G., & Gilabert, R. (2000). Two procedures to improve instructional text: Effects on memory and learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 107–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, D., Kennedy, D., & Kwok, R. C. (2009). Does using mobile device applications lead to learning? Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 20, 469–485.

    Google Scholar 

  • Volet, S. E., & Chalmers, D. (1992). Investigation of qualitative differences in university students’ learning goals, based on an unfolding model of stage development. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 62, 17–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vu, N. V., Van Der Vleuten, C. P. M., & Lacombe, G. (1998). Medical students’ learning processes: A comparative and longitudinal study. Academic Medicine, 73, S25–S27. doi:10.1097/00001888-199810000-00035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, D., McInerney, D., Akande, A., & Lee, C. (2003). An investigation of ethnic differences in the motivation and strategies for learning of students in desegregated South African schools. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34, 189–194. doi:10.1177/0022022102250563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, T. J. (1996). Motivation: That’s Maslow, isn’t it? Management Learning, 27, 447–464. doi:10.1177/1350507696274004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wautier, G., & Westman, A. S. (1995). Relationships between learning styles and solutions based on analogies or background knowledge. Psychological Reports, 77, 1115–1120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wecker, C., Kohnle, C., & Fischer, F. (2007). Computer literacy and inquiry learning: When geeks learn less. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 133–144. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00218.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein, C. E., & Mayer, R. E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 315–327). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein, Y., Bugg, J. M., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2008). Can the survival recall advantage be explained by basic memory process? Memory & Cognition, 36, 913–919. doi:10.3758/MC.36.5.913.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weldon, M. S., & Bellinger, K. D. (1997). Collective memory: Collaborative and individual processes in remembering. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 1160–1175. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.23.5.1160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weldon, M. S., & Roediger, H. L. (1987). Altering retrieval demands reserves the picture superiority effect. Memory and Cognition, 15, 269–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (2006). Learning for a small planet, a research agenda. http://ewenger.com/research/LSPfoundingdoc.doc.

  • Westman, A. S. (1993). Learning styles are content specific and probably influenced by content areas studied. Psychological Reports, 73, 512–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westman, A. S., & Alexander, N. A. (2004). Epistemological exploration: Generalization of learning styles and analytical skills between academic and religious materials. Psychological Reports, 94, 1083–1088. doi:10.2466/PR0.94.3.1083-1088.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1990). Causal model progression as a foundation for intelligent learning environments. Artificial Intelligence, 42, 99–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whiteford, G. E., & McAllister, L. (2007). Politics and complexity in intercultural fieldwork: The Vietnam experience. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 54, S74–S83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilding, J. M., & Hayes, S. (1992). Relations between approaches to studying and note-taking behaviour in lectures. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 6, 233–246. doi:10.1002/acp.2350060305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winnick, W. A., & Daniel, S. A. (1970). Two kinds of response priming in tachistoscopic word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 84, 74–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong, D. K. P., & Lam, D. O. B. (2007). Problem-Based Learning in Social Work: A Study of Student Learning Outcomes. Research on Social Work Practice, 17, 55–65. doi:10.1177/1049731506293364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Worthington, A. C. (2002). The impact of student perceptions and characteristics on teaching evaluations: A case study in finance education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27, 49–64. doi:10.1080/02602930120105054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamauchi, H., & Miki, K. (2000). Effects of students’ perception of teachers’ and parents’ attitudes on their achievement goals and learning strategies. Psychologia: An International Journal of Psychology in the Orient, 43, 188–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamauchi, H., & Miki, K. (2003). Longitudinal analysis of the relations between perceived learning environment, achievement goal orientations, and learning strategies: Intrinsic-extrinsic regulation as a mediator. Psychologia: An International Journal of Psychology in the Orient, 46, 1–18. doi:10.2117/psysoc.2003.1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yan, L., & Kember, D. (2004). Avoider and engager approaches by out-of-class groups: The group equivalent to individual learning approaches. Learning and Instruction, 14, 27–49. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2003.10.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yonelinas, A. P., Kroll, N. E. A., Dobbins, I., Lazzara, M., & Knight, R. T. (1998). Recollection and familiarity deficits in amnesia: Convergence of remember know, process dissociation, and receiver operating characteristic data. Neuropsychology, 12, 323–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • You, Z., & Jia, F. (2008). Do they learn differently? An investigation of the pre-service teachers from US and China. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 836–845.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, R., Hu, S., Sun, X., & Huang, J. (2006). Involuntary awareness and implicit priming: Role of retrieval context. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 103, 344–353. doi:10.2466/PMS.103.6.344-353.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J., & Pons, M. M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 23, 614–628.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Special thanks to Allan Wigfield, Kathryn Wentzel, Peter Afflerbach, and Gregory Hancock for their comments and suggestions on earlier drafts of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Foundations & Secondary Education, University of North Florida, Building 57, Suite 2300, 1 UNF Drive, Jacksonville, FL, 32224-7699, USA

    Daniel L. Dinsmore

  2. Department of Human Development, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA

    Patricia A. Alexander

Authors
  1. Daniel L. Dinsmore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Patricia A. Alexander
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel L. Dinsmore.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 3 Summary table of studies for the systematic literature review
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dinsmore, D.L., Alexander, P.A. A Critical Discussion of Deep and Surface Processing: What It Means, How It Is Measured, the Role of Context, and Model Specification. Educ Psychol Rev 24, 499–567 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-012-9198-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-012-9198-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation