In Study 1 the control group showed a marginally significant increase in anxiety while the treatment group did not change¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q2·i1small
Currency · newest study 2013 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i1 Treatment anxiety was unchanged (d = -0.06) while control anxiety rose marginally (d = 0.31); the interaction approached significance. → Burrus et al. 2013
Evidence¶
Burrus et al. 2013¶
Jeremy Burrus, Teresa Jackson, Steven Holtzman, and Richard D. Roberts, Terri Mandigo. (2013). Examining the Efficacy of a Time Management Intervention for High School Students. ETS Research Report Series, ETS RR-13-25. https://search.ets.org/researcher/
q2 · i1 · causal · r2
Study 1 secondary outcome (DASS anxiety scale); the interaction was F(1, 109) = 2.96, p = .09, with the printed control-group effect "d = 0.31" and treatment d = -0.06. The contrast is marginal, not significant.
"For anxiety, whereas the treatment group reported no change in self-reported anxiety (Mpre = 9.82; Mpost = 9.65) t(56) = -.42, p = .68, d = -0.06, the control group reported a marginally significant increase"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- STAC intervention students showed a trend toward decreased anxiety relative to wait-list control students (p = .06) — related
- Writing attitude changed negatively in the control group but remained unchanged in the Facebook experimental group — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.