Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-19T07:36:04.507Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

5 - The Psychology of Learner Control in Training

A Multilevel, Interactionist Framework

from Part I - Fundamental Issues in Learning and Transfer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2017

By
Garett N. Howardson ,
Karin A. Orvis ,
Sandra L. Fisher  and
Michael E. Wasserman
Edited by
Kenneth G. Brown
Kenneth G. Brown
Affiliation:
University of Iowa
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Workplace Training and Employee Development , pp. 98 - 120
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alliger, G. M., Tannenbaum, S. I., Bennett, W., Traver, H., and Shotland, A. 1997. A meta-analysis of the relations among training criteria. Personnel Psychology 50(2): 341–358.Google Scholar
Baldwin, T. T., and Ford, J. K. 1988. Transfer of training: A review and directions for future research. Personnel Psychology 41(1): 63–105.Google Scholar
Baldwin, T. T., Magjuka, R. J., and Loher, B. 1991. The perils of participation: Effects of choice of training on trainee motivation and learning. Personnel Psychology 44(1): 51–65.Google Scholar
Bandura, A. 1977. Self-efficacy: Toward a unified theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review 84: 191–215.Google Scholar
Bandura, A. 1986. Social Foundations of Thought and Action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Bandura, A. 1997. Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: Freeman.Google Scholar
Barnett, S. M., and Ceci, S. J. 2002. When and where do we apply what we learn? A taxonomy for far transfer. Psychological Bulletin 128(4): 612–637.Google Scholar
Beier, M. E., and Kanfer, R. 2010. Motivation in training and development: A phase perspective. In Kozlowski, S. W. J. and Salas, E. (Eds.), Learning Training, and Development in Organizations, 65–97. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bell, B. S., and Kozlowski, S. W. J. 2008. Active learning: Effects of core training design elements on self-regulatory processes, learning, and adaptability. Journal of Applied Psychology 93(2): 296–316.Google Scholar
Bell, B. S., and Kozlowski, S. W. J. 2010. Toward a theory of learner-centered training design: An integrative framework of active learning. In Kozlowski, S. W. J. and Salas, E., eds., Learning, Training, and Development in Organizations, 263–300. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Brown, K. G. 2001. Using computers to deliver training: Which employees learn and why? Personnel Psychology 54: 271–296.Google Scholar
Brown, K. G. 2005. An Examination of the structure and nomological network of trainee reactions: A closer look at “smile sheets.” Journal of Applied Psychology 90(5): 991–1001.Google Scholar
Brown, K. G., and Ford, J. K. 2002. Using computer technology in training: Building an infrastructure for learning. In Kraiger, K., ed., Creating, Implementing, and Managing Effective Training and Development, 192–233. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Brown, K. G., Howardson, G. N., and Fisher, S. 2016. Learner control and e-learning: Taking stock and moving forward. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 3: 267–291.Google Scholar
Brown, K. G., and Klein, H. 2008. Third-generation instruction: “Tools in the toolbox” rather than the “latest and greatest.” Industrial and Organizational Psychology 1(4): 472–476.Google Scholar
Carolan, T. F., Hutchins, S. D., Wickens, C. D., and Cumming, J. M. 2014. Costs and benefits of more learner freedom: Meta-analyses of exploratory and learner control training methods. Human Factors 56(5): 999–1014.Google Scholar
Colquitt, J. A., and Simmering, M. J. 1998. Conscientiousness, goal orientation, and motivation to learn during the learning process: A longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology 83(4): 654–665.Google Scholar
Colquitt, J. A., LePine, J. A., and Noe, R. A. 2000. Toward an integrative theory of training motivation: A meta-analytic path analysis of 20 years of research. Journal of Applied Psychology 85(5): 678–707.Google Scholar
Costa, , P. T., and McCrae, R. R. 1992. Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Deci, E. L., and Ryan, R. M. 1985. Intrinsic Motivation and Self-determination in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum PressGoogle Scholar
Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M., and Williams, G. C. 1996. Need satisfaction and the self-regulation of learning. Learning and Individual Differences 8(3): 165–183.Google Scholar
DeShon, R. P., and Gillespie, J. Z. 2005. A motivated action theory account of goal orientation. Journal of Applied Psychology 90(6): 1096–1127.Google Scholar
Diefendorff, J. M. 2004. Examination of the roles of action-state orientation and goal orientation in the goal-setting and performance process. Human Performance 17(4): 375–395.Google Scholar
Diefendorff, J. M., Richard, E. M., and Gosserand, R. H. 2006. Examination of situational and attitudinal moderators of the hesitation and performance relation. Personnel Psychology 59(2): 365–393.Google Scholar
Diefendorff, J. M., Hall, R. J., Lord, R. G., and Strean, M. L. 2000. Action-state orientation: Construct validity of a revised measure and its relationship to work-related variables. Journal of Applied Psychology 85(2): 250–263.Google Scholar
Diefendorff, J. M., Lord, G. R., Hepburn, E. T., Quickle, J. S., Hall, R. J., and Sanders, R. E. 1998. Perceived self-regulation and individual differences in selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 4(3): 228–247.Google Scholar
Fisher, S. L., and Ford, J. K. 1998. Differential effects of learner effort and goal orientation on two learning outcomes. Personnel Psychology 51:397–420.Google Scholar
Ford, J. K. 2008. Transforming our models of learning and development: How far do we go? Industrial and Organizational Psychology 1(4): 468–571.Google Scholar
Ford, J. K., Smith, E. M., Weissbein, D. A., Gully, S. M., and Salas, E. 1998. Relationships of goal orientation, metacognitive activity, and practice strategies with learning outcomes and transfer. Journal of Applied Psychology 83(2): 218–233.Google Scholar
Freitag, E. T., and Sullivan, H. J. 1995. Matching learner preference to amount of instruction: An alternative form of learner control. Educational Technology Research and Development 43(2):5–14.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. 1999. A broad-bandwidth, public-domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several Five-Factor models. In Mervielde, I., Deary, I., De Fruyt, F., and Ostendorf, F., eds., Personality Psychology in Europe, 7–28. Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.Google Scholar
Gully, S., and Chen, G. 2010. Individual differences, attribute-treatment interactions, and training outcomes. In Kozlowski, S. W. J. and Salas, E., eds., Learning, Training, and Development in Organizations, 3–64. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hannafin, R. D., and Sullivan, H. J. 1996. Preferences and learner control over amount of instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology 88(1): 162–173.Google Scholar
Heckhausen, H., and Gollwitzer, P. M. 1987. Thought contents and cognitive functioning in motivational versus volitional states of mind. Motivation and Emotion 11: 101–120.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, D. A., and Mark, B. 2006. An investigation of the relationship between safety climate and medication errors as well as other nurse and patient outcomes. Personnel Psychology 59: 847–869.Google Scholar
Holton, E. F. 1996. The flawed four-level evaluation model. Human Resource Development Quarterly 7(1): 5–21.Google Scholar
Howardson, G. N., and Behrend, T. S. 2016. Coming full circle with reactions: Understanding the structure and correlates of trainee reactions through the affect circumplex. Academy of Management Learning and Education 15(3): 1–23.Google Scholar
Hughes, M. G., Day, E. A., Wang, X., Schuelke, M. J., Arsenault, M. L., Harkrider, L. N., and Cooper, O. D. 2013. Learner-controlled practice difficulty in the training of a complex task: Cognitive and motivational mechanisms. Journal of Applied Psychology 98(1): 80–98.Google Scholar
Hutchins, S. D., Wickens, C. D., Carolan, T. F., and Cumming, J. M. 2013. The influence of cognitive load on transfer with error prevention training methods: A meta-analysis. Human Factors 55(4): 854–874.Google Scholar
Jaffee, D. 2001. Organization Theory: Tension and Change. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Kanfer, R., and Ackerman, P. L. 1989. Motivation and cognitive abilities: An integrative/aptitude-treatment interaction approach to skill acquisition. Journal of Applied Psychology 74(4): 657–690.Google Scholar
Karim, M. N., and Behrend, T. S. 2014. Reexamining the nature of learner control: Dimensionality and effects on learning and training reactions. Journal of Business Psychology 29: 87–99.Google Scholar
Keith, N., and Frese, M. 2005. Self-regulation in error management training: Emotion control and metacognition as mediators of performance effects. Journal of Applied Psychology 90(4): 677–691.Google Scholar
Keith, N., and Frese, M. 2008. Effectiveness of error management training: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology 93(1): 59–69.Google Scholar
Kozlowski, S. W. J., Gully, S. M., Brown., K. G., Salas, E., Smith, E. M., and Nason, E. R. 2001. Effects of training goals and goal orientation traits on multidimensional training outcomes and performance adaptability. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 85(1): 1–31.Google Scholar
Kozlowski, S. W. J., Toney, R. J., Mullins, M. E., Weissbein, D. A., Brown, K. G., and Bell, B. S. 2001. Developing adaptability: A theory for the design of integrated-embedded training systems. In Salas, E., ed., Advances in Human Performance and Cognitive Engineering Research, 1: 59–123. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: JAI/Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
Kraiger, K., and Culbertson, S. S. 2013. Understanding and facilitating learning: Advancements in training and development. In Schmitt, N. W., Highhouse, S., and Weiner, I. B., eds., Handbook of Psychology: Volume 12 Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2nd ed., 244–261. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Kraiger, K., and Jerden, E. 2007. A meta-analytic investigation of learner control: Old findings and new directions. In Fiore, S. M. and Salas, E., eds., Toward a Science of Distributed Learning, 65–90. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Kraiger, K., Ford, J. K., and Salas, E. 1993. Integration of cognitive, behavioral, and affective theories of learning into new methods of training evaluation. Journal of Applied Psychology 78(2): 311–328.Google Scholar
Kuhl, J. 1985. Volitional mediators cognition-behavior consistency: Self-regulatory processes and action versus state orientation. In Kuhl, J. and Beckmann, J., eds., Action Control, 101–128. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Levenson, H. 1973. Perceived parental antecedents of internal, powerful others, and chance locus of control orientations. Developmental Psychology 9: 260–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maslow, A. H. 1943. A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review 50: 370–396.Google Scholar
Mathieu, J. E., Tannenbaum, S. T., and Salas, E. 1992. Influences of individual and situational characteristics on measures of training effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal 35(4): 828–847.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E. 2004. Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discover learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. American Psychologist 59(1): 14–19.Google Scholar
McDaniel, M. A., and Schlager, M. S. 1990. Discovery learning and transfer of problem-solving skills. Cognition and Instruction 7(2): 129–159.Google Scholar
Meyer, R. D., Dalal, R. S., and Hermida, R. 2010. A review and synthesis of situational strength in organizational sciences. Journal of Management 36(1): 121–140.Google Scholar
Meyer, R. D., Dalal, R. S., Jose, I. J., Hermida, R., Chen, T. R., Vega, R. P., Brooks, C. K., and Khare, V. P. 2014. Measuring job-related situational strength and assessing its interactive effects with personality on voluntary work behavior. Journal of Management 40(4): 1010–1041.Google Scholar
Mischel, W. 1996. Personality and assessment. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Naveh, E., Katz-Navon, T., and Stern, Z. 2005. Treatment errors in healthcare: A safety climate approach. Management Science 51(6): 948–960.Google Scholar
Noe, R. A. 1986. Trainees’ attributes and attitudes: Neglected influences on training effectiveness. Academy of Management Review 11(4): 736–749.Google Scholar
Noe, R. A., Tews, M. J. and Dachner, A. M. 2010. Learner engagement: A new perspective for enhancing our understanding of learner motivation and workplace learning. Academy of Management Annals 4: 279–315.Google Scholar
Orvis, K. A., Fisher, S. L., and Wasserman, M. E. 2009. Power to the people: Using learner control to improve trainee reactions and learning in web-based instructional environments. Journal of Applied Psychology 94(4): 960–971.Google Scholar
Orvis, K. A., Brusso, R. C., Wasserman, M. E., and Fisher, S. L. 2011. Enabled for e-learning? The moderating role of personality in determining the optimal degree of learner control in an e-learning environment. Human Performance 24: 60–78.Google Scholar
Orvis, K. A., and Leffler, G. P. 2011. Individual and contextual factors: An interactionist approach to understanding employee self-development. Personality and Individual Differences 51: 172–177.Google Scholar
Quiñones, M. A. 1995. Pretraining context effects: Training assignments as feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology 80(2): 226–238.Google Scholar
Quiñones, M. A. 1997. Contextual influences on training effectiveness. In Quiñones, M. A. and Ehrenstein, A., eds., Training for a Rapidly Changing Workplace: Applications of Psychological Research, 177–199. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roethlisberger, F. J. 1941. Management and Morale. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ryan, R. M. and Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of instrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist 55(1): 68–78.Google Scholar
Schmidt, A. M., and Ford, J. K. 2003. Learning within a learner control training environment: The interactive effects of goal orientation and metacognitive instruction on learning outcomes. Personnel Psychology 56: 405–429.Google Scholar
Skinner, E. A. 1996. A guide to constructs of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71(3): 549–570.Google Scholar
Stewart, J. 2010. Jon Stewart: The most trusted name in fake news. In T. Gross (host), Fresh Air on National Public Radio, October. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130321994 (accessed November 22, 2014).Google Scholar
Taylor, F. W. 1916. The principles of scientific management. Bulletin of the Taylor Society, December. An abstract of an address given by the late Dr. Taylor before the Cleveland Advertising Club, March 3, 1915.Google Scholar
Thomas, K. M., and Mathieu, J. E. 1994. Role of causal attributions in dynamic self-regulation and goal processes. Journal of Applied Psychology 79(6): 812–818.Google Scholar
Vroom, V. H. 1964. Work and Motivation. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Weber, M. 1922. Bureaucracy. In Gerth, H. and Mills, C. W., eds., From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, 196–244. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Weiner, B. 1985. An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review 92: 548–573.Google Scholar
Welsh, E. T., Wanberg, C. R., Brown, K. G., and Simmering, M. J. 2003. E-learning: Emerging uses, empirical results and future directions. International Journal of Training and Development 7: 245–258Google Scholar
Wilson, C. L., Huang, J. L., and Kraiger, K. 2013. Personality and the analysis, design, and delivery of training. In Christiansen, N. D. and Tett, R. P., eds., Handbook of Personality at Work, 543–564. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wood, R. E., Kakebeeke, B. M., Debowski, S., and Frese, M. 2000. The impact of enactive exploration on intrinsic motivation, strategy, and performance in electronic search. Applied Psychology: An International Review 49(2): 263–283.Google Scholar
Yelon, S. L., and Ford, J. K. 1999. Pursuing a multidimensional view of transfer. Performance Improvement Quarterly 12(3): 55–78.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×