Intervention dosage (duration, frequency, intensity) shows no consistent association with app effect sizes¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesisr?·q3
Currency · newest study 2021 · 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.
q3 i? Log2 duration and log2 intensity did not predict outcomes once assessment type was controlled; evidence on dosage was inconsistent. → James Kim 2021
Evidence¶
James Kim 2021¶
James Kim, Joshua Gilbert, Qun Yu, Charles Gale. (2021). Measures Matter: A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Educational Apps on Preschool to Grade 3 Children's Literacy and Math Skills. AERA Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584211004183
q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r?
RVE meta-regression Model 2 (Table 6) with dosage moderators; log2 duration coefficient −0.012 and log2 intensity 0.012, both nonsignificant. Log2 frequency was significant (0.126, p < .05), hence the authors call the evidence inconsistent.
"the meta-regressions indicated that log2 duration and log2 intensity measures did not predict outcomes once the assessment type was included in the model"
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Time and Continuity — moderator: an instructional effect differs with it
Related Claims¶
- Dosage significantly predicts intervention effects in a linear model (β = 0.03 per hour), but the dosage main effect is no longer significant after controlling for moderators — related
- Mathematics outcomes benefit from PA with academic instruction of 6–10-week duration at moderate or moderate-to-vigorous intensity, and language outcomes from enriched PA programmes — related
- Longer total intervention time is associated with greater learning gains, especially for low achievers — related
- Coaching dosage shows precisely estimated null effects: more coaching hours are not associated with larger program effects — related
- Too few studies exist to draw robust conclusions on moderating factors (age, gender, screen size, dosage, SAMR-based activities) or on whether benefits persist beyond the post-test — related
- The authors judge insufficient instructional intensity (dosage) as the primary factor behind the null result of learning strategies instruction in adult education — related
- Most Oakland secondary students receiving LLI fell short of the recommended minimum number of sessions — related
- App quality ratings are not significantly associated with mean effect sizes controlling for assessment type — related
- Intervention creativity ratings relate to practice frequency, session duration and teacher qualification, but not intervention duration or intensity — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.