Claims

An additional 90 minutes of intensive instruction did not produce statistically significant gains in financial knowledge beyond the 11-hour camp

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · 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.

q2 i? The INTENSITY coefficient was positive but statistically insignificant, and insignificance persisted when the gain score was restricted to the 19 questions covering the extra content. → Bhattacharya et al. 2016

Evidence

Bhattacharya et al. 2016

Radha Bhattacharya, Andrew Gill, and Denise Stanley. (2016). The Effectiveness of Financial Literacy Instruction: The Role of Individual Development Accounts Participation and the Intensity of Instruction. Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, Volume 27, Number 1, 2016, 20–35. https://doi.org/10.1891/1052-3073.27.1.20

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Randomly assigned subset of camp attendees (roughly half of the 83) received an extra 90 minutes of instruction, about 14% more time in 11 instructional hours. The article reports the coefficient was "positive but statistically insignificant"; no effect size is printed.

"The coefficient of INTENSITY is positive but statistically insignificant, suggesting that increasing the intensity of instruction did not fetch gains in financial knowledge in the overall test, above and beyond the 11 hours of instruction that was already provided to all students who attended the camp"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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