Claims

AVG training effects are specific to phonemic awareness, with no significant gains in phonological working memory or rapid automatized naming

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2024 · 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 i1 Training groups did not differ significantly in individual gain on pseudoword repetition (phonological working memory) or RAN of colours. → Bertoni 2024 q3 i? Linear mixed effects models confirmed a significant time × group effect on phoneme discrimination but not on pseudoword repetition or RAN. → Bertoni 2024 (2)

Evidence

Bertoni 2024

Bertoni, S., Andreola, C., Mascheretti, S., Franceschini, S., Ruffino, M., Trezzi, V., Molteni, M., Sali, M. E., Salandi, A., Gaggi, O., Palazzi, C., Gori, S. & Facoetti, A. (2024). Action video games normalise the phonemic awareness in pre-readers at risk for developmental dyslexia. npj Science of Learning 9, 25. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-024-00230-0

q3 · i1 · causal · r2

ANCOVA null results for the two other reading-related predictors in the same four-group design. Both tests were non-significant with very small printed effects ("ηp2 = 0.026" and "ηp2 = 0.007"); equivalence was not tested.

"On the contrary, the training groups did not show any statistically significant difference in individual gain in PWR (F(3,72) = 0.647, p = 0.587, ηp2 = 0.026) and in RAN (F(3,74) = 0.172, p = 0.915, ηp2 = 0.007)"

Bertoni 2024 (2)

Bertoni, S., Andreola, C., Mascheretti, S., Franceschini, S., Ruffino, M., Trezzi, V., Molteni, M., Sali, M. E., Salandi, A., Gaggi, O., Palazzi, C., Gori, S. & Facoetti, A. (2024). Action video games normalise the phonemic awareness in pre-readers at risk for developmental dyslexia. npj Science of Learning 9, 25. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-024-00230-0

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Alternative repeated-measures linear mixed effects analysis with time, group and time × group as fixed factors and subject ID as random effects, confirming the specificity of the AVG effect to phoneme discrimination.

"A statistically significant time × group effect was found upon phoneme discrimination (F(3,75) = 3.600, p = 0.017), but not upon PWR (F(3,73.72)= 1.032, p = 0.384) and RAN (F(3,75) = 0.175, p = 0.913)."

Discussion

Learner Variables

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id avg-training-null-pwr-ran
title AVG training effects are specific to phonemic awareness, with no significant gains in phonological working memory or rapid automatized naming
description AVG training effects are specific to phonemic awareness, with no significant gains in phonological working memory or rapid automatized naming
status review
evidence_strength moderate
newest_evidence 2024
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-27
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 2 — bertoni-2024, bertoni-2024-2

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.