Elaborative interrogation

Kids are constantly inquisitive about why things are the way they are, and they appear to be learning. Is this a viable strategy?

This is referred to as elaborative interrogation.

Detailed interrogation

Elaborate questioning is a technique for improving memory. After reading or listening to the material, the learner produces questions. Then he attempts to come up with solutions that define the cause-and-effect relationship between the subject (sky) and predicate (blue). This engages students in an active learning process.

The typical suspects are the main questions asked. why? who? when? what? and in what way?

“Why do a tree’s leaves fall throughout the winter?” for example. or “What causes the leaves to fall throughout the winter?” The elaboration approach employed here assists in explaining the link that exists in the supplied information between the subject (leaves) and the predicate (fall during winter). As a result, the clarifying link seen is primarily based on recollection. However, it is unclear what specific prior information is necessary. Some researchers place a premium on topic expertise, while others place a premium on understanding the abstract aspects of the data.

Is elaborative interrogation effective?

In a well-known 2013 research comparing the effectiveness of various study strategies, elaborative questioning was shown to be effective, although commonly used tactics such as highlighting and rereading fared better. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612453266

What makes elaborative interrogation effective?

Elaborative interrogation works by building a link between the new information used to generate questions and the old knowledge used to generate replies.

As you link new information to old, your mental structure becomes more solidified, making it more difficult to forget.

Elaborative inquiry vs. self-explanation

Self-explanation is another approach that has been frequently employed. Is self-explanation preferable to in-depth interrogation?

One research (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) looked at the efficiency of two learning methods for remembering scientific facts: self-explanation and elaborative questioning. University students (N = 55) were given three options for learning knowledge about the cardiovascular system. Participants in the self-explanation task were asked to describe what the information meant to them and how they connected to their past knowledge. Participants in the in-depth interrogation explained “why” the facts made sense. Finally, the control group merely read out loud the information. On measures of cued recall and recognition, self-explanation individuals outperformed elaborative interrogation and repetition control participants considerably. Repeated interrogation was no more effective than detailed interrogation.

Despite the fact that this study contradicts elaborative interrogation, it may also be taken to mean that it is the explanation, not the query, that causes learning to stick.