Developing the Mental Effort and Load–Translingual Scale (MEL–TS) as a foundation for translingual research in self-regulated learning

Assessing cognitive demand is crucial for research on self-regulated learning; however, discrepancies in translating essential concepts across languages can hinder the comparison of research findings. Different languages often emphasize various components and interpret certain constructs differently. This paper aims to develop a translingual set of items distinguishing between intentionally invested mental effort and passively perceived mental load as key differentiations of cognitive demand in a broad range of learning situations, as they occur in self-regulated learning. Using a mixed-methods approach, we evaluated the content, criterion, convergent, and incremental validity of this scale in different languages. To establish content validity, we conducted qualitative interviews with bilingual participants who discussed their understanding of mental effort and load. These participants translated and back-translated established and new items from the cognitive-demand literature into English, Dutch, Spanish, German, Chinese, and French. To establish criterion validity, we conducted preregistered experiments using the English, Chinese, and German versions of the scale. Within those experiments, we validated the translated items using established demand manipulations from the cognitive load literature with first-language participants. In a within-subjects design with eight measurements (N = 131), we demonstrated the scale’s criterion validity by showing sensitivity to differences in task complexity, extraneous load manipulation, and motivation for complex tasks. We found evidence for convergent and incremental validity shown by medium-size correlations with established cognitive load measures. We offer a set of translated and validated items as a common foundation for translingual research. As best practice, we recommend four items within a reference point evaluation

Developing the mental effort and load–translingual scale (MEL-TS) as a foundation for translingual research in self-regulated learning

Assessing cognitive demand is crucial for research on self-regulated learning; however, discrepancies in translating essential concepts across languages can hinder the comparison of research findings. Different languages often emphasize various components and interpret certain constructs differently. This paper aims to develop a translingual set of items distinguishing between intentionally invested mental effort and passively perceived mental load as key differentiations of cognitive demand in a broad range of learning situations, as they occur in self-regulated learning. Using a mixed-methods approach, we evaluated the content, criterion, convergent, and incremental validity of this scale in different languages. To establish content validity, we conducted qualitative interviews with bilingual participants who discussed their understanding of mental effort and load. These participants translated and back-translated established and new items from the cognitive-demand literature into English, Dutch, Spanish, German, Chinese, and French. To establish criterion validity, we conducted preregistered experiments using the English, Chinese, and German versions of the scale. Within those experiments, we validated the translated items using established demand manipulations from the cognitive load literature with first-language participants. In a within-subjects design with eight measurements (N = 131), we demonstrated the scale’s criterion validity by showing sensitivity to differences in task complexity, extraneous load manipulation, and motivation for complex tasks. We found evidence for convergent and incremental validity shown by medium-size correlations with established cognitive load measures. We offer a set of translated and validated items as a common foundation for translingual research. As best practice, we recommend four items within a reference point evaluation

Are Small Effects the Indispensable Foundation for a Cumulative Psychological Science? A Reply to Götz et al. (2022).

Götz et al. (2022) argue that small effects are “the indispensable foundation for a cumulative psychological science”. They support their argument by claiming that (i) psychology, like genetics, consists of complex phenomena explained by additive small effects, (ii) psychological research culture rewards large effects, which means small effects are being ignored, and (iii) small effects become meaningful at scale and over time. We rebut these claims with three objections: (i) the analogy between genetics and psychology is misleading, (ii) p-values are the main currency for publication in psychology, meaning that any biases in the literature are (currently) caused by a pressure to publish statistically significant results and not large effects, and (iii) claims regarding small effects as important and consequential must be supported by empirical evidence or, at least, a falsifiable line of reasoning. If accepted uncritically, we believe the arguments of Götz et al. (2022) could be used as a blanket justification for the importance of any and all ‘small’ effects, thereby undermining best practices in effect size interpretation. We end with guidance on evaluating effect sizes in relative, not absolute terms

ReproducibiliTea Freiburg

Materials from ReproducibiliTea sessions in Freiburg. Templates and presentations are available for others to use and edit

ReproducibiliTea Freiburg

Materials from ReproducibiliTea sessions in Freiburg. Templates and presentations are available for others to use and edit

Do infrahumanization or affective prejudice drive teacher discrimination against Romani students? A conceptual replication of Bruneau et al. (2020) in Germany

Bruneau’s work repeatedly focused on the Roma minority, worldwide, one of the most dehumanized ethnic groups. In a preregistered design, we replicated one of his previous studies (Bruneau et al., 2020) in a different national context (i.e., Germany) in testing the hypotheses that pre-service teachers make biased educational-track recommendations discriminating against Romani students and that infrahumanization drives this behaviour. In line with Bruneau et al.’s work, pre-service teachers judged placing self-identified Romani students into lower educational tracks as more appropriate than self-identified Turkish-origin and German students, despite equal academic performance. Although participants infrahumanized Romani students at greater levels compared to non-Romani students, in contrast to the Bruneau et al.’s study, educational-track recommendations were positively associated with affective prejudice but not with infrahumanization. These findings extend Bruneau’s insights on dehumanization, prejudice, and discrimination against people of Romani background, highlighting the role of the social context in which these associations are studied

Do infrahumanization or affective prejudice drive teacher discrimination against Romani students? A conceptual replication of Bruneau et al. (2020) in Germany

Bruneau’s work repeatedly focused on the Roma minority, worldwide, one of the most dehumanized ethnic groups. In a preregistered design, we replicated one of his previous studies (Bruneau et al., 2020) in a different national context (i.e., Germany) in testing the hypotheses that pre-service teachers make biased educational-track recommendations discriminating against Romani students and that infrahumanization drives this behaviour. In line with Bruneau et al.’s work, pre-service teachers judged placing self-identified Romani students into lower educational tracks as more appropriate than self-identified Turkish-origin and German students, despite equal academic performance. Although participants infrahumanized Romani students at greater levels compared to non-Romani students, in contrast to the Bruneau et al.’s study, educational-track recommendations were positively associated with affective prejudice but not with infrahumanization. These findings extend Bruneau’s insights on dehumanization, prejudice, and discrimination against people of Romani background, highlighting the role of the social context in which these associations are studied

Do infrahumanization and affective prejudice drive teacher discrimination against Romani students? A conceptual replication of Bruneau et al. (2020) in Germany

Bruneau’s work repeatedly focused on the Roma minority, worldwide, one of the most dehumanized ethnic groups. In a preregistered design, we replicated one of his previous studies (Bruneau et al., 2020) in a different national context (i.e., Germany) in testing the hypotheses that pre-service teachers make biased educational-track recommendations discriminating against Romani students and that infrahumanization drives this behaviour. In line with Bruneau et al.’s work, pre-service teachers judged placing self-identified Romani students into lower educational tracks as more appropriate than self-identified Turkish-origin and German students, despite equal academic performance. Although participants infrahumanized Romani students at greater levels compared to non-Romani students, in contrast to the Bruneau et al.’s study, educational-track recommendations were positively associated with affective prejudice but not with infrahumanization. These findings extend Bruneau’s insights on dehumanization, prejudice, and discrimination against people of Romani background, highlighting the role of the social context in which these associations are studied

Do infrahumanization and affective prejudice drive teacher discrimination against Romani students? A conceptual replication of Bruneau et al. (2020) in Germany

Bruneau’s work repeatedly focused on the Roma minority, worldwide, one of the most dehumanized ethnic groups. In a preregistered design, we replicated one of his previous studies (Bruneau et al., 2020) in a different national context (i.e., Germany) in testing the hypotheses that pre-service teachers make biased educational-track recommendations discriminating against Romani students and that infrahumanization drives this behaviour. In line with Bruneau et al.’s work, pre-service teachers judged placing self-identified Romani students into lower educational tracks as more appropriate than self-identified Turkish-origin and German students, despite equal academic performance. Although participants infrahumanized Romani students at greater levels compared to non-Romani students, in contrast to the Bruneau et al.’s study, educational-track recommendations were positively associated with affective prejudice but not with infrahumanization. These findings extend Bruneau’s insights on dehumanization, prejudice, and discrimination against people of Romani background, highlighting the role of the social context in which these associations are studied.</p