Diagrams improved posttest accuracy only in the read-twice condition, not in the questioning conditions¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? In the read-twice condition, lessons with diagrams yielded better posttest performance than lessons without diagrams; diagram presence did not affect posttest performance in the embedded questioning or elaborative interrogation conditions. → Clinton 2016

Evidence¶

Clinton 2016¶

Clinton, V., Alibali, M. W., & Nathan, M. J. (2016). Learning About Posterior Probability: Do Diagrams and Elaborative Interrogation Help? The Journal of Experimental Education, 84(3), 579-599. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2015.1048847

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Mixed-effects model on posttest item accuracy in the randomized factorial experiment (N = 198). The interaction of diagram presence and questioning condition was significant, and in the read-twice condition "participants whose lessons included diagrams performed better on the posttest". No effect size printed.

"there was a significant interaction of diagram presence and questioning condition, Wald χ2(4, N = 198) = 6.89, p = .03. In the read-twice condition, participants whose lessons included diagrams performed better on the posttest than participants whose lessons did not include diagrams, B = 3.11, Wald Z = 2.29, p = .02"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Redundant text in the diagram did not affect posttest accuracy or difficulty ratings — related
• Elaborative interrogation increased perceived difficulty and time spent with the lesson — related
• Elaborative interrogation produced lower posttest accuracy than reading the lesson twice in a written lesson on posterior probability — related
• A regression discontinuity design on Review Exercise data supports a causal link between leveling up and higher assessment accuracy, at least for the first level-up — related