The four collaborative-activity factors jointly explain almost 50% of the variance in group performance¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2010 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The regression model with four factor scores explained R²=.494 of variance in group performance (F(4,96)=23.471, p=.000). → Janssen 2010

Evidence¶

Janssen 2010¶

Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P. A., & Kanselaar, G. (2010). Task-related and social regulation during online collaborative learning. Metacognition and Learning. doi:10.1007/s11409-010-9061-5

q2 · i? · associational · r2

Omnibus multiple regression result for 101 groups across three studies; the four interaction factor scores jointly predicted group performance with R=.494, F(4,96)=23.471, p=.000. A MANOVA confirmed aggregation across studies was justified (Pilai's trace V=.11, F(8,192)=1.35, p=.22).

"In total, the four interaction factor scores explain almost 50% of the variance in group performance scores ( R=.494, F(4, 96)=23.471, p=.000)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Regulation of social activities positively predicts group performance in CSCL inquiry tasks
• Performing social activities negatively predicts group performance in CSCL inquiry tasks — related
• In CSCL history inquiry, regulation of social activities predicts group performance while social activities are negatively related to group performance — related
• Cognitive factors explain about 49% of variance in simulation-based inquiry performance among young adults — related
• Collaborative activities in CSCL chat cluster into four factors: information discussion, regulation of task-related activities, regulation of social activities, and social activities — related