The Lure of Seductive Details During Lecture Learning

Research demonstrates that seductive details negatively impact learning from instructional materials such as textbooks and learning modules. Yet, anecdotally, teachers and students consider seductive details an enhancement to classroom lectures. We examined this apparent disconnect by exploring the impact of seductive details in mathematics lecture learning as a function of prior knowledge across 2 affective contexts: low-stakes learning and high-stakes learning. Undergraduate students viewed a video lecture on matrix algebra with or without seductive details either in a low-stakes or high-stakes learning environment. The high stakes were designed to mimic common classroom accountability for learning and were removed prior to the final test. On the final test, seductive details were generally detrimental in the low-stakes, but not high-stakes, learning environment. However, this effect was moderated by students’ prior knowledge. Students with higher prior knowledge were not impacted by seductive details in either high- or low-stakes learning environments. In contrast, students with lower prior knowledge—those most in need of pedagogical assistance—learned more when seductive details were included in a high-stakes lecture environment. These results suggest that seductive details may not be as detrimental as previously concluded, and may even be beneficial in an incentivized learning environment for students who have the most to learn.

[1]  A. Baddeley,et al.  Context-dependent memory in two natural environments: on land and underwater. , 1975 .

[2]  W. Kintsch,et al.  Recognition memory for statements from a classroom lecture. , 1977 .

[3]  Steven M. Smith,et al.  Environmental context and human memory , 1978 .

[4]  W. Kintsch Learning from text, levels of comprehension, or: Why anyone would read a story anyway , 1980 .

[5]  J. Eccles Expectancies, values and academic behaviors , 1983 .

[6]  R. Baumeister,et al.  A review of paradoxical performance effects: Choking under pressure in sports and mental tests , 1986 .

[7]  Mary Budd Rowe,et al.  Wait Time: Slowing Down May Be A Way of Speeding Up! , 1986 .

[8]  K. Tobin The Role of Wait Time in Higher Cognitive Level Learning , 1987 .

[9]  C. S. White,et al.  Effects of 'Seductive Details' on Macroprocessing and Microprocessing in Adults and Children , 1989 .

[10]  J. Eccles,et al.  The development of achievement task values: A theoretical analysis , 1992 .

[11]  R. Garner,et al.  "Seductive details" and learning from text. , 1992 .

[12]  R. Bjork Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. , 1994 .

[13]  F. Craik,et al.  The effects of divided attention on encoding and retrieval processes in human memory. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[14]  R. Mayer,et al.  The Role of Interest in Learning From Scientific Text and Illustrations: On the Distinction Between Emotional Interest and Cognitive Interest , 1997 .

[15]  R. Bjork,et al.  The mismeasure of memory: when retrieval fluency is misleading as a metamnemonic index. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[16]  J. Eccles,et al.  Expectancy-Value Theory of Achievement Motivation. , 2000, Contemporary educational psychology.

[17]  Wolff‐Michael Roth,et al.  Prevalence, function, and structure of Photographs in high school biology textbooks , 2003 .

[18]  H. Pashler,et al.  Concurrent task effects on memory retrieval , 2003, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[19]  Sian L. Beilock,et al.  More on the fragility of performance: choking under pressure in mathematical problem solving. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[20]  K. Scherer,et al.  How Seductive Details Do Their Damage : A Theory of Cognitive Interest in Science Learning , 2004 .

[21]  Shannon F. Harp,et al.  The Consequences of Including Seductive Details during Lecture , 2005 .

[22]  Sian L. Beilock,et al.  When High-Powered People Fail , 2005, Psychological science.

[23]  R. Bjork,et al.  Illusions of competence in monitoring one's knowledge during study. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[24]  J. Smallwood,et al.  The restless mind. , 2006, Psychological bulletin.

[25]  J. Caverni,et al.  Choking under pressure and working memory capacity: When performance pressure reduces fluid intelligence , 2006, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[26]  J. Wiley,et al.  An examination of the seductive details effect in terms of working memory capacity , 2006, Memory & cognition.

[27]  Marci S. DeCaro,et al.  From poor performance to success under stress: working memory, strategy selection, and mathematical problem solving under pressure. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[28]  Matthew T. McCrudden,et al.  Processing and recall of seductive details in scientific text , 2007 .

[29]  Daniel M. Oppenheimer,et al.  Overcoming intuition: metacognitive difficulty activates analytic reasoning. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[30]  Michaela Dewar,et al.  Forgetting Due to Retroactive Interference: A Fusion of Müller and Pilzecker's (1900) Early Insights into Everyday Forgetting and Recent Research on Anterograde Amnesia , 2007, Cortex.

[31]  R. Mayer Applying the science of learning: evidence-based principles for the design of multimedia instruction. , 2008, The American psychologist.

[32]  Sian L. Beilock,et al.  Math Performance in Stressful Situations , 2008 .

[33]  S. L. Beilock Math Performance in Stressful , 2008 .

[34]  J. Metcalfe,et al.  CURRENT DIRECTIONS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Metacognitive Judgments and Control of Study , 2022 .

[35]  A. Towler Effects of trainer expressiveness, seductive details, and trainee goal orientation on training outcomes , 2009 .

[36]  Dc Washington National Governors Association and Chief Council of State School Officers. , 2010 .

[37]  Howy Jacobs Race to the top , 2010, EMBO reports.

[38]  Sian L. Beilock,et al.  Choke or thrive? The relation between salivary cortisol and math performance depends on individual differences in working memory and math-anxiety. , 2011, Emotion.

[39]  Marci S. DeCaro,et al.  Choking under pressure: multiple routes to skill failure. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[40]  J. P. Mclean,et al.  Daydreaming and its correlates in an educational environment , 2011 .

[41]  Roland Brünken,et al.  Does cognitive load moderate the seductive details effect? A multimedia study , 2011, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[42]  Michaela Dewar,et al.  Brief Wakeful Resting Boosts New Memories Over the Long Term , 2012, Psychological science.

[43]  Sian L. Beilock,et al.  The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Spatial Anxiety Relates to Spatial Abilities as a Function of Working Memory in Children , 2022 .

[44]  Günter Daniel Rey A Review of Research and a Meta-Analysis of the Seductive Detail Effect. , 2012 .

[45]  M. Mazzocco,et al.  Primary School Age Students' Spontaneous Comments about Math Reveal Emerging Dispositions Linked to Later Mathematics Achievement , 2012 .

[46]  R. Bjork,et al.  Self-regulated learning: beliefs, techniques, and illusions. , 2013, Annual review of psychology.

[47]  Alan Kingstone,et al.  Everyday attention: Mind wandering and computer use during lectures , 2013, Comput. Educ..

[48]  The experience of thinking : how the fluency of mental processes influences cognition and behaviour , 2013 .

[49]  D. Schacter,et al.  Interpolated memory tests reduce mind wandering and improve learning of online lectures , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[50]  Michaela Dewar,et al.  Boosting Long-Term Memory via Wakeful Rest: Intentional Rehearsal Is Not Necessary, Consolidation Is Sufficient , 2014, PloS one.

[51]  Traci Sitzmann,et al.  The paradox of seduction by irrelevant details: How irrelevant information helps and hinders self-regulated learning , 2014 .

[52]  Roland Brünken,et al.  Do Learner Characteristics Moderate the Seductive-Details-Effect? A Cognitive-Load-Study Using Eye-Tracking , 2015, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[53]  Doug Lemov Teach Like a Champion 2.0 , 2015 .

[54]  Marci S. DeCaro,et al.  Mindfulness, anxiety, and high-stakes mathematics performance in the laboratory and classroom , 2015, Consciousness and Cognition.

[55]  D. Schacter,et al.  Enhancing attention and memory during video-recorded lectures. , 2015 .

[56]  Sarah K. Tauber,et al.  When Confidence Is Not a Signal of Knowing: How Students’ Experiences and Beliefs About Processing Fluency Can Lead to Miscalibrated Confidence , 2015 .

[57]  Nate Kornell,et al.  Do the Best Teachers Get the Best Ratings? , 2016, Front. Psychol..

[58]  Carole L. Yue,et al.  Using Selective Redundancy to Eliminate the Seductive Details Effect , 2017 .

[59]  Greg McVerry Applying the Science of Learning: Evidence-Based Principles for the Design of MultimediaInstruction , 2019 .

[60]  R. Mayer Illustrations That Instruct , 2019, Advances in Instructional Psychology.