Drawing quality predicted JOLs to a similar extent in both drawing conditions, contrary to the expectation that scaffolds would strengthen this cue use¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3·i1small
Currency · newest study 2020 · 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 i1 Drawing quality was a significant predictor of JOLs (b = 0.29, p = 0.03, r = 0.28), and the condition-by-quality interaction was not significant (p = 0.21, r = 0.17). → Julia Kollmer 2020
Evidence¶
Julia Kollmer 2020¶
Julia Kollmer, Katrin Schleinschok, Katharina Scheiter, Alexander Eitel. (2020). Is drawing after learning effective for metacognitive monitoring only when supported by spatial scaffolds? Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-020-09521-6
q3 · i1 · causal · r2
Moderation analysis with z-standardized drawing quality, condition, and their interaction predicting mean JOLs. The interaction missed significance (b = 2.81, p = 0.21, r = 0.17); without the interaction, "drawing quality was a significant predictor for JOLs" in both drawing conditions taken together.
"A regression analysis without the interaction term, however, revealed that drawing quality was a significant predictor for JOLs, b = 0.29, SE = 0.13, t = 2.22, p = 0.03, r = 0.28, whereas the condition was not, b = − 1.13, SE = 4.33, t = -0.26, p = 0.80, r = 0.03."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Drawing after learning, both from scratch and with spatial scaffolds, improves absolute monitoring accuracy (calibration) compared with a time-matched mental reactivation control condition — related
- Age did not interact with associative relatedness or effective encoding-strategy use in predicting JOLs, indicating no age differences in the use of these two sources of information when making judgments of learning — related
- Drawing quality was diagnostic for later test performance only when drawings were made with spatial scaffolds, not when made from scratch — related
- Drawing quality was positively associated with learning outcomes across the drawing conditions, replicating the prognostic drawing effect — related
- Scaffolded drawing showed no significant advantage over drawing from scratch for absolute monitoring accuracy — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
drawing-quality-predicts-jols-similarly-both-conditions |
title |
Drawing quality predicted JOLs to a similar extent in both drawing conditions, contrary to the expectation that scaffolds would strengthen this cue use |
description |
Drawing quality predicted JOLs to a similar extent in both drawing conditions, contrary to the expectation that scaffolds would strengthen this cue use |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2020 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-18 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — julia-kollmer-2020 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.