Claims

Baseline-to-final performance change was centered near zero with a mean of −1.83

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2031: baselines and conditions change

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 i? The performance-change score averaged −1.835 (median −1.50), indicating final assessment was on average slightly below the prior-performance baseline. → Shen 2026

Evidence

Shen 2026

Shen, N., Lee, L. S., and He, A. (2026). Generative AI in creative education: baseline-linked evidence on learning processes, artistic performance, and authorship. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1956939

q2 · i? · associational · r2

Descriptive analysis of the linked dataset (Figure 1C, Table 1) shows the change score, computed as final total minus baseline score, centered near zero with the printed mean of −1.83. The article treats it as a course-based indicator, not an experimental gain score.

"Figure1C shows that performancechangeiscenteredclosetozero,withthemeanchange at −1.83."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id baseline-final-change-near-zero
title Baseline-to-final performance change was centered near zero with a mean of −1.83
description Baseline-to-final performance change was centered near zero with a mean of −1.83
status review
evidence_strength moderate
newest_evidence 2026
recheck_by 2031
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-10
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — shen-2026

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