High-learning groups show a significantly shorter time gap between initiating annotations and re-annotations than low-learning groups, indicating reduced attention distance¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr1·q3·i1small
Currency · newest study 2026 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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 i1 High-learning groups exhibited a significantly shorter time gap between initiating annotations and re-annotations than low-learning groups (p < 0.001; effect size rank-biserial rrb = 0.216, small). → Yiqiu Zhou and Jina Kang 2026
Evidence¶
Yiqiu Zhou and Jina Kang 2026¶
Yiqiu Zhou and Jina Kang. (2026). From individual annotations to shared attention: How re-annotation supports collaborative knowledge building in CSCL. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-026-09486-7
q3 · i1 · small effect, rank-biserial r = 0.216 · associational · r1
Mann-Whitney U comparison of annotation-to-re-annotation time gaps pooled within 16 groups (9 high-, 7 low-learning) drawn from 25 self-formed groups of 77 undergraduates; the test compares individual time-gap observations, not the 16 groups. Time gap gave U = 40,374.0, p < 0.001, with the "significantly shorter time gap between initiating and re-annotations" finding; the printed effect size is a rank-biserial correlation, rrb = 0.216 (mean gap 46.2 s against 58.4 s).
"Notably, high-learning groups exhibited a significantly shorter time gap between initiating and re-annotations, suggesting that they were more responsive to peer annotations, engaging in more immediate collaborative interactions."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- High- and low-learning groups do not differ significantly in the quantity or breadth of initiating annotations and re-annotations — related
- Epistemic network analysis shows high-learning groups integrate re-annotations with knowledge-confirming discourse more densely than low-learning groups — related
- Initiating annotation frequency strongly correlates with re-annotation frequency across groups (Kendall's tau = 0.95) — related
- Group-level annotation activity shows no significant association with verbal knowledge-construction frequency — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
high-learning-groups-shorter-reannotation-time-gap |
title |
High-learning groups show a significantly shorter time gap between initiating annotations and re-annotations than low-learning groups, indicating reduced attention distance |
description |
High-learning groups show a significantly shorter time gap between initiating annotations and re-annotations than low-learning groups, indicating reduced attention distance |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2026 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-18 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — yiqiu-zhou-and-jina-kang-2026 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.