Explanation impacts hypothesis generation, but not evaluation, during learning

A large body of research has shown that engaging in self-explanation improves learning across a range of tasks. It has been proposed that the act of explaining draws attention and cognitive resources towards evidence that supports good explanations—information that is broad, abstract, and consistent with prior knowledge—which in turn aids discovery and promotes generalization. However, it remains unclear whether explanation impacts the learning process via improved hypothesis generation, increasing the probability that the most generalizable hypotheses are considered in the first place, or hypothesis evaluation, the appraisal of such hypotheses in light of observed evidence. In two experiments with adults, we address this question by separating hypothesis generation and evaluation in a novel category learning task and quantifying the effect of explaining on each process independently. We find that explanation supports learners' generation of broad and abstract hypotheses but does not impact their evaluation of them. These results provide a more precise account of the process by which explanation impacts learning and offer additional support for the claim that hypothesis generation and evaluation play distinct roles in problem solving.