Haptic exploration does not increase situational interest, duration of stay, or number of objects inspected in the first showroom¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? After controlling for prior knowledge and interest, no significant main effects of vision or haptics were found on situational interest, duration of stay, or number of objects inspected in the first showroom. → Magdalena Novak & Stephan Schwan 2021

Evidence¶

Magdalena Novak & Stephan Schwan 2021¶

Magdalena Novak & Stephan Schwan. (2021). Does Touching Real Objects Affect Learning? Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09551-z

q3 · i? · causal · r2

ANCOVA on situational interest after showroom 1 (M = 3.66, SD = 0.65) controlling for prior knowledge and interest found "no significant main effect for vision" and none for haptics under the Bonferroni-adjusted α of .004; duration of stay (all F < 3.3) and objects inspected (all F < 1.1) also showed no differences.

"we found no significant main effect for vision, F(1,157) = 0.27, p =. 6 0 6 , ηp2 < 0.01, and no significant main effect for haptics, F(1,157) = 4.19, p =. 0 4 2 ,ηp2 =0 . 0 3 ."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Interest — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Touching objects heightens negative affect during exhibition visit — related
• Haptic experience in the first showroom does not transfer to increased engagement or knowledge in a second showroom with poster information — related