Validating the concept of immediacy of strategy use for the regulation of collaborative learning: results from an expert study

  • During collaborative learning, different types of regulation problems such as cognitive, metacognitive, motivational, and emotional problems between group members may hinder the learning process. Once groups have noticed a problem, they need to apply a regulation strategy for the problem to alleviate it. Yet, so far, it is unclear which regulation strategies to use in the light of what problem. Therefore, we propose the concept of immediacy of strategy use: A regulation strategy is considered immediate for a problem if it can solve this problem without further strategies necessary. In this study, we tested the content validity of this immediacy concept by using an expert study methodology. We explored (a) which regulation strategies experts regard as immediate for which problems, (b) to what extent they agree in their immediacy ratings, and (c) whether they distinctly categorize regulation strategies into immediate and non-immediate strategies for specific problems. N = 59 expertsDuring collaborative learning, different types of regulation problems such as cognitive, metacognitive, motivational, and emotional problems between group members may hinder the learning process. Once groups have noticed a problem, they need to apply a regulation strategy for the problem to alleviate it. Yet, so far, it is unclear which regulation strategies to use in the light of what problem. Therefore, we propose the concept of immediacy of strategy use: A regulation strategy is considered immediate for a problem if it can solve this problem without further strategies necessary. In this study, we tested the content validity of this immediacy concept by using an expert study methodology. We explored (a) which regulation strategies experts regard as immediate for which problems, (b) to what extent they agree in their immediacy ratings, and (c) whether they distinctly categorize regulation strategies into immediate and non-immediate strategies for specific problems. N = 59 experts rated the immediacy of 27 regulation strategies for eight social regulation problems. Our results indicate that experts can concordantly identify an immediate regulation strategy for regulation problems. The only exceptions were the regulation problems “Incompatible Working Methods” and “Unfair Distribution of Work Load”. Additionally, for each problem, we could clearly differentiate between various immediate and non-immediate regulation strategies. In summary, our findings strongly support the content validity of the immediacy concept. Future research could implement and investigate the immediacy concept in educational practice to support immediate strategy use for problem regulation during collaborative learning.show moreshow less

Download full text files

Export metadata

Statistics

Number of document requests

Additional Services

Share in Twitter Search Google Scholar
Metadaten
Author:Laura SpangGND, Martin GreiselORCiDGND, Ingo KollarORCiDGND
URN:urn:nbn:de:bvb:384-opus4-1206757
Frontdoor URLhttps://opus.bibliothek.uni-augsburg.de/opus4/120675
ISSN:0732-118XOPAC
Parent Title (English):New Ideas in Psychology
Publisher:Elsevier BV
Place of publication:Amsterdam
Type:Article
Language:English
Year of first Publication:2025
Publishing Institution:Universität Augsburg
Release Date:2025/03/24
Volume:78
First Page:101155
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2025.101155
Institutes:Philosophisch-Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät
Philosophisch-Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Psychologie
Philosophisch-Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Psychologie / Lehrstuhl für Psychologie mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Pädagogischen Psychologie
Dewey Decimal Classification:1 Philosophie und Psychologie / 15 Psychologie / 150 Psychologie
Licence (German):CC-BY 4.0: Creative Commons: Namensnennung (mit Print on Demand)