Certainty predicts diagnostic performance; mental effort adds no predictive value beyond certainty¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In logistic reanalysis of Blissett et al. (2018) data, both AIC and BIC preferred the model in which certainty alone predicts performance; mental effort's contribution beyond certainty was not significant. → Jimmie Leppink & Patricia Pérez-Fuster 2019

Evidence¶

Jimmie Leppink & Patricia Pérez-Fuster 2019¶

Jimmie Leppink & Patricia Pérez-Fuster. (2019). Mental Effort, Workload, Time on Task, and Certainty: Beyond Linear Models. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-018-09460-2

q2 · i? · associational · r1

Five competing fixed-effects logistic regression models on the Blissett et al. (2018) task-level data (binary correct/incorrect performance); Model L1 (certainty only) was preferred, and mental effort in Model L3 was not significant: "B = − 0.073, p = 0.395".

"Both AIC and BIC prefer Model L1, and from the differences in R2McF it is easy to understand why. Model L1 explains considerably more than Model L2 (difference in R2McF of about 0.069), and next to certainty— going from Model L1 to Model L3— mental effort adds almost nothing (difference in R2McF of about 0.002). In Model L3, we find for mental effort: B = − 0.073, p = 0.395, and 95% CI = [− 0.243; 0.096]."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Mental effort relates to self-rated certainty in a cubic (declining–flat–declining) rather than linear pattern — related
• Evidence on the mental effort–workload relation is mixed: AIC prefers quadratic, BIC prefers linear — related