Providing expert example standards enhances absolute judgment accuracy in evaluating self-generated examples¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3·i2medium
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.
q3 i2 Students with expert example standards showed higher absolute accuracy (values closer to zero) than students without them (ηp2 = .09). → Linda Froese 2022
Evidence¶
Linda Froese 2022¶
Linda Froese, Julian Roelle. (2022). Expert example standards but not idea unit standards help learners accurately evaluate the quality of self-generated examples. Metacognition and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-022-09293-z
q3 · i2 · causal · r2
The same 2×2 factorial ANOVA on overall absolute accuracy showed a significant main effect of expert example standards, ηp2 = .09; idea unit standards and the interaction were not significant.
"However, there was a statistically significant main effect of expert example standards, indicating higher absolute accuracy (i.e., values closer to zero) in the groups with expert example standards, F(1, 127) = 11.90, p = .001, ηp2 = .09."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Idea unit standards do not enhance judgment accuracy in evaluating self-generated examples — related
- Providing expert example standards reduces bias in learners' evaluations of self-generated examples — related
- Expert example standards did not significantly enhance relative accuracy in evaluating self-generated examples — related
- Providing a rubric during self-assessment improves the absolute accuracy of high school students' self-assessments of written scientific abstracts — related
- Learners partly use example length as a cue when evaluating their self-generated examples — related
- Providing a rubric reduces bias in self-assessment, moving judgments closer to expert ratings — related
- Expert example standards improve university students' judgment accuracy (bias, absolute accuracy, and relative accuracy) when evaluating self-generated examples — related
- Negative example standards do not reliably improve judgment accuracy and significantly decrease relative accuracy in evaluating self-generated examples — related
- The benefits of rubrics on self-assessment accuracy do not depend on the inferential level of the assessment criteria — related
- Benefits of expert example standards depend on example quality: largest for incorrect examples, absent for correct ones — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
expert-example-standards-enhance-absolute-accuracy |
title |
Providing expert example standards enhances absolute judgment accuracy in evaluating self-generated examples |
description |
Providing expert example standards enhances absolute judgment accuracy in evaluating self-generated examples |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2022 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-18 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — linda-froese-2022 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.