Choice decreases self-reported distraction during the lesson, while utility value's effect on distraction depends on baseline interest in statistics¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3 · i0 negligible
Currency · newest study 2025 · checked against its sources 2026-10-25 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i0 The choice manipulation decreased distraction by .15 standard deviations relative to control (d = −0.15, p = .017). → Asher 2025 q3 i? The utility value manipulation interacted with baseline interest in statistics (b = 0.17, p = .006), decreasing distraction for lower-interest participants but increasing it for higher-interest participants. → Asher 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

Asher 2025¶

Asher, M. W., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2025). Using Choice and Utility Value to Promote Interest: Stimulating Situational Interest in a Lesson and Fostering the Development of Interest in Statistics. Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000921

q3 · i0 · causal · r?

Meta-regression of the choice contrast on self-reported distraction across Studies 1–7 showed choice "decreased distraction by .15 standard deviations relative to control, d = −0.15, p = .017."

"The choice manipulation decreased distraction by .15 standard deviations relative to control, d = −0.15, p = .017."

Asher 2025 (2)¶

Asher, M. W., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2025). Using Choice and Utility Value to Promote Interest: Stimulating Situational Interest in a Lesson and Fostering the Development of Interest in Statistics. Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000921

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Meta-analyzed D-UV × baseline interest in statistics interaction on distraction (b = 0.17, p = .006): the manipulation "decreased distraction for participants with lower levels of initial interest, but it also increased distraction for those with higher levels of initial interest."

"it did interact with their baseline interest in statistics, b = 0.17, p = .006, suggesting that the directly-communicated utility value manipulation decreased distraction for participants with lower levels of initial interest, but it also increased distraction for those with higher levels of initial interest."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Attention — outcome: instruction changes it
• Interest — moderator: an instructional effect differs with it
• Motivation — moderator: an instructional effect differs with it

Related Claims¶

• Providing meaningful choice during a lesson increases perceived autonomy and triggered situational interest in undergraduates learning statistics — related
• Neither choice nor utility value manipulations improve end-of-session regression test performance, and the two manipulations do not interact — related