Descriptive habit-strength ratings rank highlighting highest, followed by rereading, self-testing, and concept mapping¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Descriptive analyses showed highlighting had the highest mean habit strength (M = 6.21) and concept mapping the lowest (M = 3.06), with ineffective strategies rated above effective ones. → Ann-Kathrin Krause 2025

Evidence¶

Ann-Kathrin Krause 2025¶

Ann-Kathrin Krause, Jasmin Breitwieser, Garvin Brod. (2025). Understanding Learning Strategy Use Through the Lens of Habit. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10087-3

q2 · i? · associational · r1

Descriptive analysis of the same 64-student proof-of-concept survey, reported with Fig. 4. Means and SDs are descriptive only; the article notes highlighting and rereading showed ceiling effects and concept mapping a bimodal distribution. No inferential test is attached to these descriptives.

"Highlighting showed the highest habit strength (M = 6.21, SD = 1.00), followed by rereading (M = 5.75, SD = 1.45). In contrast, the more effective strategies exhibited lower values: self-testing had a mean of 4.04 ( SD = 1.66), and concept mapping showed a mean of 3.06 ( SD = 1.51, see Fig. 4)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Ineffective learning strategies show substantially higher habit strength than effective strategies in a proof-of-concept survey — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• Highlighting shows low utility for improving learning outcomes — related
• Summarization, highlighting, the keyword mnemonic, imagery for text, and rereading receive low utility assessments — related