Contrasting erroneous examples were more often effective than correct examples and problem-solving, sometimes equally or more effective than erroneous examples¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · review r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In Con-ErrEx vs CorrEx comparisons, Con-ErrEx was the beneficial example type in several studies, including significantly better merged-condition performance. → Sonja Dieterich 2025 q2 i? In ErrEx vs Con-ErrEx comparisons, results were mixed: Con-ErrEx was superior for classification questions but not for application questions. → Sonja Dieterich 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

Sonja Dieterich 2025¶

Sonja Dieterich, Stefan Rumann, Marc Rodemer. (2025). Conditions for Effective Learning from Erroneous Examples: A Systematic Review. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10071-x

q2 · i? · review · r3

Table 1 entry for Barbieri and Devlin (2024), a Con-ErrEx vs CorrEx comparison with mathematical figures and KR feedback, reports "Con-ErrEx were significantly better as single type condition". The comparison and sequential Con-ErrEx conditions were not significantly different and were merged.

"Con-ErrEx were significantly better as single type condition (merged condition of CorrEx and ErrEx)"

Sonja Dieterich 2025 (2)¶

Sonja Dieterich, Stefan Rumann, Marc Rodemer. (2025). Conditions for Effective Learning from Erroneous Examples: A Systematic Review. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10071-x

q2 · i? · review · r3

Table 1 entry for Corral and Carpenter (2020), combining data from two experiments with scenario texts and elaborated feedback, reports Con-ErrEx learned significantly more than CorrEx and ErrEx for classification questions, while for application questions ErrEx and Con-ErrEx enhanced learning equally.

"For classification question, Con-ErrEx learned significantly more than CorrEx and ErrEx. For application questions ErrEx and Con-ErrEx enhanced learning equally and outperformed CorrEx"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Prior knowledge moderates the effectiveness of erroneous and contrasting erroneous examples, with low-prior-knowledge learners benefiting in several studies but findings contradictory — related
• Erroneous examples show no general learning benefit over correct examples in most comparisons, but outperform them for negative knowledge in some studies — related
• Erroneous examples produce significantly higher delayed-test learning gains than problem solving for decimal learning — related
• Contrasting examples, correct examples, erroneous examples, and practice problems produced no differences in learning gains or transfer of unbiased-reasoning skills — reports the opposite