In one 51-learner experiment on help formats in computer-based electrical engineering instruction, far-transfer scores were at the floor in every condition, and time spent on instruction did not differ significantly between conditions¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2004 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Evidence quality · No study behind this claim is a peer-reviewed article with a DOI: it rests on an ERIC document (a report, conference paper or thesis). It is kept because 3 design pages cite it; treat it as a lead to check, not an established finding.

Subclaims¶

q2 i? All treatment groups encountered difficulties on far-transfer problems, indicating a floor effect on that measure. → Reisslein 2004 q2 i? An ANOVA on instructional time found no statistically significant differences between treatment groups. → Reisslein 2004 (2)

Evidence¶

Reisslein 2004¶

Reisslein, J., Atkinson, R. K., & Reisslein, M. (2004). Exploring the Presentation and Format of Help in a Computer-Based Electrical Engineering Learning Environment. Arizona State University. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED484994

q2 · i? · causal · r2

In the 51-participant experiment, far-transfer posttest means were low in all four conditions (e.g., 1.04 and 1.00 of 12); the authors state "we encountered a floor effect on this measure".

"The results suggest that all the learners, regardless of the treatment condition, encountered difficulties when attempting to solve the far -transfer problems. Essentially, we encountered a floor effect on this measure."

Reisslein 2004 (2)¶

Reisslein, J., Atkinson, R. K., & Reisslein, M. (2004). Exploring the Presentation and Format of Help in a Computer-Based Electrical Engineering Learning Environment. Arizona State University. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED484994

q2 · i? · causal · r2

An ANOVA on time spent in paper-based training and computer-based learning found "No statistically significant differences between the different treatment groups were found", ruling out time as an explanation for format effects.

"an analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted on these times. No statistically significant differences between the different treatment groups were found."

Discussion¶

This page records two separate results from one experiment (Reisslein, Atkinson & Reisslein 2004, 51 participants, four help-format conditions). First, far transfer: means were low in all four conditions (for example 1.04 and 1.00 of 12), so that measure could not discriminate between the help formats, and the study says nothing about which format supports far transfer. Second, instructional time: an ANOVA found no significant difference between conditions, which makes unequal time an unlikely explanation for the format effects on other measures, though a non-significant difference in a sample this size does not show the times were equal.

Related Claims¶

• Learning techniques have much smaller effects on deep learning and far transfer than on surface learning and near transfer — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it

• Textual instructional prompts yield significantly higher near-transfer posttest performance than pictorial prompts for novice circuit-analysis learners — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it

• Discrepant training conditions (+1/+2) provided limited evidence of greater transfer to related spatial reasoning tasks than own-level training — related
• Training with maps one or two levels above the child's current level produces greater map drawing advance than training with maps at the child's own level — related
• Easy tasks showed a floor effect across all participants and were excluded from hypothesis testing — related
• Total learning time did not differ, but the worked-example group tended to spend more time on the most relevant quality-criteria content — related
• Textual prompts produce higher first-attempt practice accuracy, while pictorial prompts produce higher second-attempt accuracy — related
• Test-score increases occurred only for identical and near-transfer problems; no increases were found for far-transfer problems in any of the three conditions — related