Effort-rating item wording changes what learners reflect on: requirement wording correlates negatively and engagement wording positively with judgments of learning¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · reviewr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2020 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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? Requirement-worded effort items yield negative correlations with judgments of learning, while engagement-worded items yield positive correlations. → Tina Seufert 2020
Evidence¶
Tina Seufert 2020¶
Tina Seufert. (2020). Building Bridges Between Self-Regulation and Cognitive Load—an Invitation for a Broad and Differentiated Attempt. Educational Psychology Review, 32, 1151–1162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09574-6
q2 · i? · review · r2
The review reports that in several special-issue studies, "the requirement-wording results in a negative correlation with judgments of learning" whereas "the engagement-wording results in positive correlations." No coefficients are printed in the review.
"While the requirement-wording results in a negative correlation with judgments of learning and thus would reflect an effort as difficulty view, the engagement-wording results in positive correlations, reflecting an effort as important view."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Effort measurement type moderates the correlation: self-agency ratings show a positive association and subjective ratings a stronger negative one than objective measures — related
- Task type moderates the correlation: problem-solving tasks show a stronger negative association than word/paired-associate tasks — related
- Effort appraisals correlate negatively with monitoring judgments: high mental effort is associated with poorer performance judgments — a broader claim this one bears on
- In the multivariate meta-regression, goal-driven manipulation, judgment timing, and task type remain significant moderators — related
- Monitoring judgment timing moderates the correlation: concurrent judgments show a stronger negative association than prospective judgments — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
effort-item-wording-flips-correlation-direction |
title |
Effort-rating item wording changes what learners reflect on: requirement wording correlates negatively and engagement wording positively with judgments of learning |
description |
Effort-rating item wording changes what learners reflect on: requirement wording correlates negatively and engagement wording positively with judgments of learning |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2020 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-19 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — tina-seufert-2020 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.