Theses and dissertations

This collection includes both ASU Theses and Dissertations, submitted by graduate students, and the Barrett, Honors College theses submitted by undergraduate students. 

Displaying 1 - 2 of 2
Filtering by

Clear all filters

153874-Thumbnail Image.png

Distinguishing emergent and sequential processes by learning emergent second-order features

Description
Emergent processes can roughly be defined as processes that self-arise from interactions without a centralized control. People have many robust misconceptions in explaining emergent process concepts such as natural selection and diffusion. This is because they lack a proper categorical representation of emergent processes and often misclassify these processes into…

Emergent processes can roughly be defined as processes that self-arise from interactions without a centralized control. People have many robust misconceptions in explaining emergent process concepts such as natural selection and diffusion. This is because they lack a proper categorical representation of emergent processes and often misclassify these processes into the sequential processes category that they are more familiar with. The two kinds of processes can be distinguished by their second-order features that describe how one interaction relates to another interaction. This study investigated if teaching emergent second-order features can help people more correctly categorize new processes, it also compared different instructional methods in teaching emergent second-order features. The prediction was that learning emergent features should help more than learning sequential features because what most people lack is the representation of emergent processes. Results confirmed this by showing participants who generated emergent features and got correct features as feedback were better at distinguishing two kinds of processes compared to participants who rewrote second-order sequential features. Another finding was that participants who generated emergent features followed by reading correct features as feedback did better in distinguishing the processes than participants who only attempted to generate the emergent features without feedback. Finally, switching the order of instruction by teaching emergent features and then asking participants to explain the difference between emergent and sequential features resulted in equivalent learning gain as the experimental group that received feedback. These results proved teaching emergent second-order features helps people categorize processes and demonstrated the most efficient way to teach them.
ContributorsXu, Dongchen (Author) / Chi, Michelene (Thesis advisor) / Homa, Donald (Committee member) / Glenberg, Arthur (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
155659-Thumbnail Image.png

Connecting to the future: a revised measure of exogenous perceptions of instrumentality

Description
The primary objective of this study was to revise a measure of exogenous instrumentality, part of a larger scale known as the Perceptions of Instrumentality Scale (Husman, Derryberry, Crowson, & Lomax, 2004) used to measure future oriented student value for course content. Study 1 piloted the revised items, explored the…

The primary objective of this study was to revise a measure of exogenous instrumentality, part of a larger scale known as the Perceptions of Instrumentality Scale (Husman, Derryberry, Crowson, & Lomax, 2004) used to measure future oriented student value for course content. Study 1 piloted the revised items, explored the factor structure, and provided initial evidence for the reliability and validity of the revised scale. Study 2 provided additional reliability evidence but a factor analysis with the original and revised scale items revealed that the revised scale was measuring a distinct and separate construct that was not exogenous instrumentality. Here this new construct is called extrinsic instrumentality for grade. This study revealed that those that endorse a high utility value for grade report lower levels of connectedness (Husman & Shell, 2008) and significantly less use of knowledge building strategies (Shell, et al., 2005). These findings suggest that there are additional types of future oriented extrinsic motivation that should be considered when constructing interventions for students, specifically non-major students. This study also provided additional evidence that there are types of extrinsic motivation that are adaptive and have positive relationships with knowledge building strategies and connectedness to the future. Implications for the measurement of future time perspective (FTP) and its relationship to these three proximal, future oriented, course specific measures of value are also discussed.
ContributorsPuruhito, Krista (Author) / Husman, Jenefer (Thesis advisor) / Glenberg, Arthur (Committee member) / Lindstron-Johnson, Sarah (Committee member) / Levy, Roy (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017