In a human experiment, verbatim facts are learned better from practice-only training while general skills are learned better from example-integrated training (cross-over content-treatment interaction)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3·i3large
Currency · newest study 2023 · 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.
q3 i3 Participants learning facts gained more from practice-only (EPPP) training whereas participants learning skills gained more from example-integrated (EPEP) training, a statistically reliable interaction. → Rachatasumrit 2023
Evidence¶
Rachatasumrit 2023¶
Rachatasumrit, N., Koedinger, K. R., & Carvalho, P. F. (2023). Evidence and theory for why the best example-problem ratio to optimize learning gain depends on knowledge content. https://osf.io/29wpe doi:10.31234/osf.io/eyxfw
q3 · i3 · causal · r2
Experiment 1: 95 Mechanical Turk participants randomly assigned to EPPP or EPEP training of facts or skills, pretest-posttest with trivia-filled retention interval. The interaction was statistically reliable, β = 0.41, t (124.53) = 2.09, p = .038, d = 0.38, in a mixed-effects model controlling for pretest.
"for facts (on left in panel a) Practice-Only (blue bar) produces higher learning gains than does Study-Practice (orange bar) whereas for skills (on right in a) Study-Practice produces higher learning gain (orange) than does Practice-Only (blue)"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- In simulated learners with forgetting, study-practice yields higher skill gains while practice-only yields higher fact gains, mirroring the human pattern — related
- The training-by-content interaction did not vary with retention interval duration in the human experiment — related
- The training-by-content interaction is not specific to test question type, indicating transfer between skill and fact learning — related
- Adding a memory (forgetting) mechanism slightly decreases simulated learning gains overall yet improves alignment with human results, apparently by letting agents discard incorrect rules — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
crossover-content-treatment-interaction-facts-practice-skills-examples |
title |
In a human experiment, verbatim facts are learned better from practice-only training while general skills are learned better from example-integrated training (cross-over content-treatment interaction) |
description |
In a human experiment, verbatim facts are learned better from practice-only training while general skills are learned better from example-integrated training (cross-over content-treatment interaction) |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2023 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-12 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — rachatasumrit-2023 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.