Embedded source credibility rating scales during video viewing improve middle-schoolers' source identity recognition, especially at delayed posttest¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i1 Students confronted with embedded rating scales outperformed students without them on source identity recognition (η²p=.026). → Colin Lescarret 2022 q3 i1 Recognition scores deteriorated between immediate and delayed posttest only for students without the embedded rating scales; the ERS group showed no significant deterioration (interaction η²p=.034). → Colin Lescarret 2022 (2)

Evidence¶

Colin Lescarret 2022¶

Colin Lescarret, Julien Magnier, Valérie Le Floch, Jean-Christophe Sakdavong, and 2 more. (2022). Do you trust this speaker? The impact of prompting on middle-school students’ consideration of source when watching conflicting videos. Preprint, Research Square. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1998147/v1

q3 · i1 · causal · r2

Mixed ANOVA on recognition scores in the 2×2 between-subjects experiment (N=262 seventh graders), with playback time as covariate. The ERS group outperformed the no-ERS group with effect size "η²p=.026" (F(1,253)=6.682, p=.010), M difference=-0.27.

"Between-subjects effects revealed a main effect of the factor Embedded Rating Scales, F(1,253)=6.682, p=.010, η²p=.026. Post-hoc tests indicated that the group of students confronted with the ERS outperformed the group of students who were not"

Colin Lescarret 2022 (2)¶

Colin Lescarret, Julien Magnier, Valérie Le Floch, Jean-Christophe Sakdavong, and 2 more. (2022). Do you trust this speaker? The impact of prompting on middle-school students’ consideration of source when watching conflicting videos. Preprint, Research Square. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1998147/v1

q3 · i1 · causal · r2

Mixed ANOVA interaction of experimental phase and embedded rating scales on recognition, effect size "η²p=.034" (F(1,253)=8.994, p=.003). Scores deteriorated significantly from immediate to delayed posttest only in the no-ERS group (M difference=0.392); the ERS group's deterioration (M difference=0.077) was not significant (pbonferroni=1.000).

"the interaction effect Experimental Phase*Embedded Rating Scales proved significant, F(1,253)=8.994, p=.003, η²p=.034"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Combining the instructional video with embedded rating scales yielded the highest immediate recognition, but the advantage faded by delayed posttest — related
• Students exposed to embedded rating scales mention interviewees' expertise more often in their convincingness justifications — related
• Embedded rating scales make middle-schoolers more likely to judge the expert (researcher) speaker as the most convincing — related
• Watching an instructional video on sourcing before viewing had no significant effect on source recognition or convincingness judgments — related