In Study 1, university students using ChatTutor scored significantly higher than teaching-as-usual students on a delayed conceptual knowledge test four weeks after the lesson, but did not differ significantly from ChatGPT students¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r3 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2025 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 The one-way ANOVA showed a significant effect of learning condition on follow-up conceptual knowledge, η2 = 0.088. → Guido Makransky 2025 q3 i? ChatTutor students scored significantly higher than teaching-as-usual students (p = 0.001) but not ChatGPT students (p = 0.229) on the delayed test. → Guido Makransky 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

Guido Makransky 2025¶

Guido Makransky, Ban M. Shiwalia, Tue Herlau, Steven Blurton. (2025). Beyond the "Wow" Factor: Using Generative AI for Increasing Generative Sense-Making. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10039-x

q3 · i2 · causal · r3

Pre-registered between-subjects experiment in a university cognitive psychology course; the follow-up ANOVA on delayed conceptual knowledge showed "a significant effect of learning condition on performance on the follow-up conceptual knowledge test, F(2, 121) = 5.866, p = 0.004, η2 = 0.088."

"The one-way ANOVA showed a significant effect of learning condition on performance on the follow-up conceptual knowledge test, F(2, 121) = 5.866, p = 0.004, η2 = 0.088."

Guido Makransky 2025 (2)¶

Guido Makransky, Ban M. Shiwalia, Tue Herlau, Steven Blurton. (2025). Beyond the "Wow" Factor: Using Generative AI for Increasing Generative Sense-Making. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10039-x

q3 · i? · causal · r3

Fisher's LSD post hoc tests on the Study 1 follow-up showed "students in the ChatTutor condition (M = 7.26, SD = 1.50) scored significantly higher than those in the teaching condition (M = 5.93, SD = 2.15), p = 0.001" while the ChatTutor–ChatGPT contrast was not significant (p = 0.229).

"Fisher's LSD post hoc comparisons revealed that students in the ChatTutor condition (M = 7.26, SD = 1.50) scored significantly higher than those in the teaching condition (M = 5.93, SD = 2.15), p = 0.001, but not the ChatGPT condition (M = 6.72, SD = 1.76), p = 0.229."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• In Study 1, ChatTutor students answered significantly more new follow-up conceptual knowledge items correctly than teaching-as-usual students, controlling for the testing effect — related
• In Study 1, the three conditions did not differ significantly on the immediate post-test of conceptual knowledge — related
• In Study 1, ChatTutor produced significantly higher trust, enjoyment, and behavioral intentions than ChatGPT, while students were blind to condition — related
• Role-script support (TAU) during generation led university relearning students to outperform direct instruction in all weeks but the first — related
• Technology-enhanced adaptive teaching improves delayed but not immediate learning outcomes compared with business-as-usual teaching — related