Low to medium disfluency does not harm learning and sometimes descriptively improves it, though the effect is unstable¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · reviewr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2022 · 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.
q2 i? Across three text-legibility levels, low legibility descriptively increased learning performance versus a legible control, and the only significant recall difference favored medium over high disfluency. → Alexander Skulmowski & Kate Man Xu 2022
Evidence¶
Alexander Skulmowski & Kate Man Xu 2022¶
Alexander Skulmowski & Kate Man Xu. (2022). Understanding Cognitive Load in Digital and Online Learning: a New Perspective on Extraneous Cognitive Load. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09624-7
q2 · i? · review · r2
The review reports, citing Seufert et al. (2017), that "a low level of legibility (and thus, disfluency) resulted in the descriptive result of an increased learning performance when compared to the legible (fluid) control condition"; a follow-up study found only the medium-versus-high disfluency recall difference was significant.
"out of three levels of varying text legibility, a low level of legibility (and thus, disfluency) resulted in the descriptive result of an increased learning performance when compared to the legible (fluid) control condition."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Medium moderated disfluency effects on reasoning: disfluent text fostered calibration and performance on screen but not on paper — related
- Disfluency increased study times without improving performance, suggesting time was spent deciphering text rather than processing contents more deeply — reports the opposite
- All 13 special-issue studies failed to show overall better performance due to disfluency — reports the opposite
- Disfluency does not automatically elicit effortful processing; test expectancy improves retention and transfer while disfluency has no effect — reports the opposite
- Medium slant is 9.76 per cent less legible than vertical writing, while mixed writing is 4.26 per cent more legible than extreme slant — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
disfluency-low-levels-not-harm-learning |
title |
Low to medium disfluency does not harm learning and sometimes descriptively improves it, though the effect is unstable |
description |
Low to medium disfluency does not harm learning and sometimes descriptively improves it, though the effect is unstable |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2022 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-21 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — alexander-skulmowski-kate-man-xu-2022 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.