Claims

Heuristic task-selection training is not more effective for transfer than algorithmic training

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2018 · 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 i? Contrary to Hypothesis 2b, the heuristic and algorithmic training conditions did not differ in transfer task-selection accuracy. → Raaijmakers 2018

Evidence

Raaijmakers 2018

Raaijmakers, S. F., Baars, M., Schaap, L., Paas, F., van Merriënboer, J., & van Gog, T. (2018). Training self-regulated learning skills with video modeling examples: Do task-selection skills transfer? Instructional Science, 46, 273–290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-017-9434-0

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Mann–Whitney U test comparing the heuristic (n = 37) and algorithmic (n = 42) conditions on transfer test accuracy found no significant difference (r = .06); equivalence was not tested.

"However, in contrast to Hypothesis 2b, the heuristic and algorithmic training conditions did not differ from each other, U = 724.0, p = .602, r = .06."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id heuristic-not-superior-to-algorithmic-transfer
title Heuristic task-selection training is not more effective for transfer than algorithmic training
description Heuristic task-selection training is not more effective for transfer than algorithmic training
status review
evidence_strength moderate
newest_evidence 2018
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-18
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — raaijmakers-2018

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.