Claims

Among 50 reviewed studies, 42 examined cognitive effects, with most showing large effects (d ≥ 0.8) but seven showing no or negative effects

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

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? Forty-two of the 50 reviewed studies investigated cognitive effects of authentic learning. → Valentina Nachtigall 2022 q2 i? The majority of studies (n = 18) demonstrated large cognitive effects (d ≥ 0.8), while nine showed small and seven no or negative effects. → Valentina Nachtigall 2022 (2)

Evidence

Valentina Nachtigall 2022

Valentina Nachtigall, David Williamson Shaffer, Nikol Rummel. (2022). Stirring a Secret Sauce: A Literature Review on the Conditions and Effects of Authentic Learning. Educational Psychology Review (2022) 34:1479–1516. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09676-3

q2 · i? · review · r2

Descriptive analysis in the review's Results section reporting how many of the 50 included experimental or quasi-experimental studies measured cognitive outcomes such as "knowledge acquisition, achievement, or performance".

"Forty-two of the 50 studies investigated the cognitive effects of authentic learning."

Valentina Nachtigall 2022 (2)

Valentina Nachtigall, David Williamson Shaffer, Nikol Rummel. (2022). Stirring a Secret Sauce: A Literature Review on the Conditions and Effects of Authentic Learning. Educational Psychology Review (2022) 34:1479–1516. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09676-3

q2 · i? · review · r2

Distribution of Cohen's d across the 42 studies (Fig. 5): 18 large (d ≥ 0.8), eight moderate, nine small, and seven no or negative effects; the review reports these as descriptive counts of study-level mean effect sizes, with "large cognitive effects" in most studies.

"The majority of the stud- ies (n = 18) demons trated large cognitive effects (i.e., d ≥ 0.8) of aut hentic learn- ing settings."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id cognitive-effects-distribution-42-studies
title Among 50 reviewed studies, 42 examined cognitive effects, with most showing large effects (d ≥ 0.8) but seven showing no or negative effects
description Among 50 reviewed studies, 42 examined cognitive effects, with most showing large effects (d ≥ 0.8) but seven showing no or negative effects
status review
evidence_strength moderate
newest_evidence 2022
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-21
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 2 — valentina-nachtigall-2022, valentina-nachtigall-2022-2

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