Claims

Timing of instructional input (before vs. after case comparison) did not significantly affect conceptual knowledge acquisition

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2023 · 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 i? Defining principles before versus after case comparison produced no significant difference in knowledge (ηp² = 0.003); the authors conclude that merely delaying information is not beneficial. → Julia Kienzler 2023

Evidence

Julia Kienzler 2023

Julia Kienzler, Thamar Voss, Jörg Wittwer. (2023). Student teachers' conceptual knowledge of operant conditioning: How can case comparison support knowledge acquisition? Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-023-09627-7

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Null result from the same MANCOVA in the randomized 2×2 experiment (N = 181). The printed ηp² values (0.003, 0.01) are negligible; equivalence was not tested.

"no significant effect of timing of input, F(3, 169) = 0.19, p = .904, ηp2 = 0.003, and no significant interaction effect, F(3, 169) = 0.32, p = .810, ηp2 = 0.01"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id input-timing-no-effect-knowledge-case-comparison
title Timing of instructional input (before vs. after case comparison) did not significantly affect conceptual knowledge acquisition
description Timing of instructional input (before vs.
status review
evidence_strength moderate
newest_evidence 2023
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 — julia-kienzler-2023

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