Both conditions improved in overall idea units, evidence-based units and functional units, with no significant condition-by-time differences¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causalr1–r2·q3
Currency · newest study 2022 · 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? The group-by-time interaction for the number of idea units was not statistically significant; both conditions increased from initial to final assessment. → Iordanou 2022
q3 i? The time-by-condition interaction for evidence-based units was not statistically significant; both conditions improved. → Iordanou 2022 (2)
Evidence¶
Iordanou 2022¶
Iordanou, K. (2022). Supporting strategic and meta-strategic development of argument skill: the role of reflection. Metacognition and Learning, 17, 399–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-021-09289-1
q3 · i? · causal · r1
GLMM (Poisson) on essay idea units, 19 students per condition. The interaction "F(1, 72) = 2.293, p = 0.134" was non-significant; the time effect was significant, with A&R rising from M = 1.526 to 3.842 and controls from 2.000 to 3.368.
"The inter action between group and time was not statistically significant, F(1, 72) = 2.293, p = 0.134. The fixed effect of group was not statistically significant, F(1, 72) = 0.000, p = 1.000, while the fixed effect of time was statistically significant, F(1, 72) = 34.673, p < 0.001"
Iordanou 2022 (2)¶
Iordanou, K. (2022). Supporting strategic and meta-strategic development of argument skill: the role of reflection. Metacognition and Learning, 17, 399–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-021-09289-1
q3 · i? · causal · r2
GLMM on evidence-based units in essays showed no condition-by-time interaction ("F(1, 72) = 0.740, p = 0.393") but a significant time effect: A&R rose from M = 1.421 to 3.737, controls from 1.211 to 3.053. Functional units showed the same pattern (interaction p = 0.096).
"The time condition interaction was not statistically significant, F(1, 72) = 0.740, p = 0.393. The main effect of time was statistically significant F(1, 72) = 56.990, p < 0.001"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Both agent-based model and visualization video conditions produce comparable gains in declarative nanoscience knowledge, with no Group × Time interaction
- Microgenetic analysis showed the reflection condition diverged from the control condition in Weakening-Other usage only after reflective activities were introduced
- The two conditions performed comparably in using evidence to support their own position, the less demanding argument function — related
- Meta-level (meta-strategic and epistemic) talk in the two conditions followed a comparable pattern until reflective activities were introduced, after which the patterns differed — related
- Peer response groups increase the number of idea units in English learners' writing but show no significant effect on composition quality or sentences written (Prater & Bermudez, 1993) — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
argumentation-practice-improves-argument-output-both-conditions |
title |
Both conditions improved in overall idea units, evidence-based units and functional units, with no significant condition-by-time differences |
description |
Both conditions improved in overall idea units, evidence-based units and functional units, with no significant condition-by-time differences |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2022 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-19 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
2 — iordanou-2022, iordanou-2022-2 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.