The delayed erroneous-examples benefit holds for both low and high prior knowledge students¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2015 · 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.
q3 i? There was no significant interaction between condition and prior knowledge level on immediate or delayed gains, and the delayed advantage was significant within both low (d=.35) and high prior knowledge (d=.37) subgroups. → Bruce M. McLaren & Deanne M. Adams & Richard E. Mayer 2015
Evidence¶
Bruce M. McLaren & Deanne M. Adams & Richard E. Mayer 2015¶
Bruce M. McLaren & Deanne M. Adams & Richard E. Mayer. (2015). Delayed Learning Effects with Erroneous Examples: a Study of Learning Decimals with a Web-Based Tutor. International Artificial Intelligence in Education Society 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-015-0064-x
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Median-split analysis (200 low, 190 high prior knowledge) plus a stepwise regression on pretest as a continuous variable found "no significant interaction between condition and prior knowledge level". Separate ANCOVAs showed significant delayed gains for both subgroups (d=.35 and d=.37).
"However, there was no significant interaction between condition and prior knowledge level for gains between either the pretest to the immediate posttest (F(1386)=.36, MSE=145.69, p=.55) or pretest to the delayed posttest F (1386)=.67, MSE=27.44, p=.41)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- The delayed erroneous-examples advantage replicated at one school but was not statistically significant at the other — related
- Time on task does not explain the erroneous-examples delayed learning advantage — related
- Erroneous examples and problem solving do not differ significantly on an immediate posttest — related
- DRL scaffolding significantly benefits high prior knowledge students while BKT does not, and condition-by-prior-knowledge interactions are not significant — related
- Erroneous examples produce significantly higher delayed-test learning gains than problem solving for decimal learning — a broader claim this one bears on
- Erroneous examples do not raise general confidence calibration but yield more high-confidence correct answers on the delayed posttest — related
- Erroneous examples benefit learners with more prior knowledge, while correct-only solutions better serve low-prior-knowledge learners — reports the opposite
- Students like problem solving more than erroneous examples and find its interface easier, though it yields weaker delayed learning — related
- Contrasting examples, correct examples, erroneous examples, and practice problems produced no differences in learning gains or transfer of unbiased-reasoning skills — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
erroneous-examples-benefit-both-prior-knowledge-levels |
title |
The delayed erroneous-examples benefit holds for both low and high prior knowledge students |
description |
The delayed erroneous-examples benefit holds for both low and high prior knowledge students |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2015 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-16 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — bruce-m-mclaren-deanne-m-adams-richard-e-mayer-2015 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.