Uncovering the problem-solving process: cued retrospective reporting versus concurrent and retrospective reporting.

By Tamara van Gog, Fred Paas, J. V. van Merriënboer, P. Witte. Journal of experimental psychology. Applied, 2005

375 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Mechanical Engineering

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d35877e7ed70749015233de07b3fcfcc5287dad9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. Tamara van Gog
2. Katharina Scheiter
3. Daniel L. Dinsmore
4. Erno Lehtinen
5. Patricia A. Alexander
6. S. Loughlin
7. Peter Gerjets
8. Halszka Jarodzka

In Mechanical Engineering

1. Tamara van Gog

Citations in the corpus

• Focusing the Conceptual Lens on Metacognition, Self-regulation, and Self-regulated Learning (2008, background): “For example, if the construct was defined as metacognitive knowledge, as in the van Gog et al. (2005)”
• Student Teachers’ and Experienced Teachers’ Professional Vision of Students’ Understanding of the Rational Number Concept (2020, positive): “Hence, CRR combines the advantages of concurrent reporting (which is impossible while teaching) with the advantages of retrospective recall (van Gog et al. 2005).”
• In the eyes of the beholder: How experts and novices interpret dynamic stimuli (2010, methodology): “The cue used here consisted of the videos with the recordings of participants’ own eye movements superimposed onto the video (Van Gog et al., 2005).”