Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Literature reported mixed evidence on whether active exploration benefits spatial knowledge acquisition over passive exploration. Active spatial learning typically involves at least physical control of one's movement or navigation decision-making, while passive participants merely observe during exploration. To quantify the effects of active exploration in learning large-scale, unfamiliar environments, we analysed previous findings with the multi-level meta-analytical model. Potential moderators were identified and examined for their contributions to the variability in effect sizes. Of the 128 effect sizes retrieved from 33 experiments, we observed a small to moderate advantage of active exploration over passive observation. Important moderators include gender composition, decision-making, types of spatial knowledge, and matched visual information. We discussed the implications of the results along with the limitations.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/17470218231185121 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!