本研究主要目的有二:㈠爲探討思考模式不同與學術經驗不同的大學生的後設認知成分的差異性,藉以說明影響後設認知的因素。㈡爲探討認知策略訓練對智力促進的效果,以爲說明智力促進的可行性。 研究一的受試是40名研究生及70名大一學生。研究工具爲多重智力測驗的後設認知測驗。從學術經驗不同與思考模式不同的受試者的後設認知成分差異性之結果顯示:高低學術經驗者的後設認知成分有差異存在,不同思考模式者的後設認知成分亦有差異存在。由此顯示「學術經驗」與「思考模式」會影響後設認知,而後設認知是智力的重要成分。 研究二爲探討智力促進的效果。受試者是105名大學生,分三組參與不同認知策略的訓練。多變項及單變項變異數分析結果顯示:「後設認知」及「學如何學」兩組的內在智力顯然不同於控制組的內在智力,尤其是在「後設認知成分」上更有顯著的差異。由此可見,智力是可以經由敎學而加以促進的。
The purposes of this study were (1) to testity the truth of the viewpoints that ”metacomponents are the important components of intelligence”, and (2) to examine the effects of the training of cognitive strategies on the imcrement of intelligence scores. Study 1 examined the truth of the viewpoints that ”metaconponents are the important components of intelligence.” Forty graduate students and 70 undergraduate freshmen were served as subjects and the differences of their metacomponents were compared. The results showed that there were significant differences between the graduate students and freshmen in scores of metacomponents. There were also significant differences between them in their thinking process modes. While the graduate students tended to adopt top-down thinking process in problem solving, the freshmen tended to adopt bottom-up thinking process. The results revealed that both the ”scholastic experience” and the modes of ”thinking process” may influence metacomponents. In study 2, 105 undergraduate freshmen were arranged to participate one of three cognitive strategies training, the results of MANOVA showed that the scores of internal intelligence (especially on metacomponents) of two trained groups were significantly higher than those of control group. This implied that it is possible to increase intelligence scores through instruction of cognitive strategies.
為了持續優化網站功能與使用者體驗,本網站將Cookies分析技術用於網站營運、分析和個人化服務之目的。
若您繼續瀏覽本網站,即表示您同意本網站使用Cookies。