Elaborative interrogation
In one study, elaborative interrogation meant that learners answered "why" the facts made sense[1]. One description presents it as a process of inquiry, in contrast to passively absorbing information, that makes material more relevant and memorable[2].
Key points
- In a comparison involving 55 university students, elaborative interrogation was no more effective than simply repeating facts aloud[1].
- In the same comparison, self-explanation participants significantly outperformed the elaborative interrogation group on cued recall and recognition[1].
- In a two-day case-based ethics programme, the results suggest that elaborative interrogation techniques can significantly improve internally-focused ethical sensemaking strategies[3].
How it works
In that study, 55 university students learned facts about the cardiovascular system using one of three approaches, and the aim was to examine the retention of scientific facts[1]. Besides the elaborative interrogation group, one group used self-explanation, explaining what the facts meant to them and how they related to their prior knowledge[1]. A control group simply repeated the facts aloud[1].
What the research says
Self-explanation participants significantly outperformed elaborative interrogation and repetition control participants on measures of cued recall and recognition[1]. Elaborative interrogation was no more effective than repetition[1]. The authors discussed the results in terms of the practicality and flexibility of each approach[1].
Other descriptions and settings
One description says elaborative interrogation is particularly effective in educational settings where critical thinking and comprehension are key[2]. The same description says it can be applied across subjects, from history and science to mathematics and literature[2].
A study of a two-day case-based Responsible Conduct of Research ethics programme examined case elaboration methods alongside outcome valence[3]. Its results suggest that elaborative interrogation techniques can significantly improve internally-focused ethical sensemaking strategies associated with personal biases, constraints and emotions[3].
Limits of the evidence
Results of case-based education are described as varying widely with case content and case presentation[3].
Sources
- B O'Reilly T, Symons S, MacLatchy-Gaudet H. A Comparison of Self-Explanation and Elaborative Interrogation. Contemp Educ Psychol. 1998. doi:10.1006/ceps.1997.0977
- C Tim Seifert. "Learning Strategies in the Classroom" . Mun.ca . Retrieved 2015-09-20 . mun.ca
- B Johnson JF, Bagdasarov Z, MacDougall AE, Steele L, Connelly S, Devenport LD, et al.. Improving ethical knowledge and sensemaking from cases through elaborative interrogation and outcome valence. Account Res. 2014. doi:10.1080/08989621.2013.848803