College students' scores on an online source credibility assessment improved significantly after four course-embedded modules in an asynchronous nutrition course¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2021 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Average assessment scores improved from 3.95 to 7.08 out of 13, a statistically significant gain of 3.13 points, regardless of test-form order. → Breakstone 2021

Evidence¶

Breakstone 2021¶

Breakstone, J., Smith, M., Connors, P., Ortega, T., Kerr, D., & Wineburg, S. (2021). Lateral reading: College students learn to critically evaluate internet sources in an online course. Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) Misinformation Review. https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-56

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Single-group pretest–posttest study of 87 undergraduates in two sections of an asynchronous online nutrition course, using parallel assessment forms with counterbalanced order. The repeated-measures ANOVA showed "an average gain of 3.13 points" with F(1, 85) = 136.03, p < .001; no effect size was printed.

"Average scores improved from 3.95 points out of 13 at pretest to 7.08 at posttest, an average gain of 3.13 points. A repeated-measures ANOVA revealed that the gains from pretest to posttest were statistically significant, Mean diff = 3.13; F(1, 85) = 136.03, p < .001."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Civic Online Reasoning Instruction Improves Evaluation — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
• Students in the AI-integrated database course showed large, statistically significant pre/post gains on seven identical database assessment questions — related
• Gains in source evaluation held regardless of the order in which students took the two assessment forms — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• After the modules, students engaged in lateral reading far more often, rising from 3 of 87 students at pretest to 67 of 87 at posttest — related