本研究探討學在聯結概念與實例方面之兩項議題：沒有產生聯結之理由，以及形成聯結之可能困難。一百二十位大學生研讀一個機率原理與實例，然後回答一系列與原理與實例相關的問題：是否想備而兩者之間的關係、它們之間的相似性與差異性、兩者在概念上的對應之處。兩個次要變項的作用亦列入探索：實例是否與原理有關、作答時是否參考教材。參與者被隨機分配至由此二變項交叉形成的四個情境。整體而言，聯結者較未聯結者表現稍佳，但是平均正確表現皆低於50%。參與者對應較多原理和實例之間的外顯元素與較少的內隱元素（178 vs. 99），平均正確反應的結果亦同（1.00 vs. 0.24）。這些結果指出連結原理和實例是困難的，而它們之間對應的顯除性是造成困難的原因之一。其他兩個變項的結果顯示：原理和實例的關係在有關聯時較無關聯時更容易被注意，參考教材似乎在原理與實例有關聯時較為有益。研究最後並針對這些發現討論教學與研究上的意涵。

Two issues on connecting principled information and worked examples in formal learning were addressed: the reason students fail to do so, and a possible cause of the difficulty. One hundred and twenty university students studied a principle and a worked example, and then answered a series of questions regarding the principle and the example: whether they thought of their relation, the similarities and differences between them, and the conceptual correspondences between them. Two additional variables were included to explore their effects: whether the example was related to the principle and whether reviewing was allowed when answering the questions. The participants were randomly assigned to one of the four conditions created by crossing the two variables. Overall, those who made the coonection performed slightly better than those who did not, and the correct performances of the two were no better than 50010. Together, the participants mapped more explicit elements than implicit elements (178 vs. 99) between the principle and the example, so as the mean correctresponses(1.00 vs. 0.24).These results suggested that it was difficult to connect the principle and example, and whether the correspondences were explicit was one cause of the difficulty. Results about the two additional variables showed that when the principle and example were related, their relation was more likely to be noticed than when they were not. Furthermore, viewing the learning material seemed to be beneficial only when the example was related to the principle. Implications of these findings for instructional and research practices were discussed.