Repeated training substantially reduces the proportion of biased responders and increases improved and correct responders at the individual level¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2024 · 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? After Session 1, 47.9% of training-group participants were classified as improved responders versus 11.8% in control, while biased responders were 23.7% versus 66.1%. → Nina Franiatte 2024
q3 i? After Session 2, only 12.1% of the training group remained biased responders, and 70.9% were correct responders. → Nina Franiatte 2024 (2)
Evidence¶
Nina Franiatte 2024¶
Nina Franiatte, Esther Boissin, Alexandra Delmas, Wim De Neys. (2024). Boosting Debiasing: Impact of Repeated Training on Reasoning. Learning and Instruction. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2023.101845
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Individual-level direction-of-change classification (Raoelison & De Neys, 2019; categories from Boissin et al., 2021, 2022) of all 120 Session 1 reasoners into biased, correct, improved, and other categories.
"They amounted to 11.8% of reasoners in the control group and 47.9% in the training group."
Nina Franiatte 2024 (2)¶
Nina Franiatte, Esther Boissin, Alexandra Delmas, Wim De Neys. (2024). Boosting Debiasing: Impact of Repeated Training on Reasoning. Learning and Instruction. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2023.101845
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Session 2 individual-level classification: 70.9% of the training group were correct responders giving majority "11" patterns (vs 27.4% in control), improved reasoners rose 15.1% (vs 4.8% spontaneous improvement in control), and only 12.1% remained biased.
"Finally, in the training group there only remained 12.1% biased responders (vs 66.1% in the control group"
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Proportional Reasoning — outcome: instruction changes it
Related Claims¶
- A second training session two days later further increases reasoning accuracy beyond the first session, though less strongly — related
- A single debiasing training session significantly increases both intuitive and deliberate accuracy on classic reasoning tasks compared to control — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
individual-level-improved-responders-after-repeated-training |
title |
Repeated training substantially reduces the proportion of biased responders and increases improved and correct responders at the individual level |
description |
Repeated training substantially reduces the proportion of biased responders and increases improved and correct responders at the individual level |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2024 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-23 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
2 — nina-franiatte-2024, nina-franiatte-2024-2 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.