The game sessions showed high attendance, engagement, and enjoyment, with no differences among conditions¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (3 entries) · causal r3 · q4
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q4 i? Children completed an average of 7.41 of 8 game sessions, with no significant condition differences in attendance. → James-Brabham 2024 q4 i? Experimenter-rated engagement averaged 4.5 of 5 and did not differ by condition. → James-Brabham 2024 (2) q4 i? Children's self-reported enjoyment averaged 4.17 of 5 and did not significantly vary among conditions. → James-Brabham 2024 (3)

Evidence¶

James-Brabham 2024¶

James-Brabham, E., Jay, T., & Sella, F. (2024). No evidence that playing a linear number board game improves numerical skills beyond teaching as usual: a randomized controlled trial in four- to five-year-old primary school children. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000857

q4 · i? · causal · r3

Attendance analysis in the RCT: a one-way ANOVA found the number of completed sessions did not significantly vary among conditions (F(2, 246)=0.717, p=.489); the printed mean was 7.41 (SD=0.92) of 8 sessions.

"Children had high attendance as they completed an average of 7.41 ( SD=0.92, range=3-8) out of 8 game sessions."

James-Brabham 2024 (2)¶

James-Brabham, E., Jay, T., & Sella, F. (2024). No evidence that playing a linear number board game improves numerical skills beyond teaching as usual: a randomized controlled trial in four- to five-year-old primary school children. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000857

q4 · i? · causal · r3

Experimenter-rated on-task engagement per session on a 5-point scale; a mixed ANOVA found a main effect of Session (F(6.68, 1642.27)=2.242, p[gg]=.031) but no significant Condition effect or Condition × Session interaction (ps≥.301), with Bonferroni-corrected post-hoc tests all non-significant.

"Overall, children displayed high engagement when playing the games, with an average score of 4.5 out of 5 ( SD=0.51, range=2.29-5)."

James-Brabham 2024 (3)¶

James-Brabham, E., Jay, T., & Sella, F. (2024). No evidence that playing a linear number board game improves numerical skills beyond teaching as usual: a randomized controlled trial in four- to five-year-old primary school children. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000857

q4 · i? · causal · r3

Post-test enjoyment ratings (two smiley-scale questions averaged) analyzed in a one-way ANOVA; the printed mean was 4.17 (SD=1.15) with no significant condition difference.

"Children displayed high enjoyment with an average score of 4.17 ( SD=1.15, range=1-5), which did not significantly vary among conditions (F(2, 246)=0.055, p=.946)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Attending a game session rather than a lecture increased all epistemic emotions except boredom among university students in a Diplomacy-based international relations course. — related
• KBD configuration produced no significant between-condition differences in system acceptance, intrinsic motivation, or subjective learning effectiveness in a single tutoring session — related
• Adaptive versus non-adaptive ITS condition showed no significant differences in mental effort, subjective difficulty, or enjoyment — related
• In a pre-registered RCT, neither the forward nor bidirectional number board game (nor the alphabet control) produced a statistically significant condition effect on numerical or letter-sound outcomes in four- to five-year-olds — related
• Children preferred playing a number game over a letter game at pre-test, and this preference did not vary by condition — related