Intervention types (cue-generation encoding-based, retrieval-based, cue-attention, cue-selection) do not substantially differ in effectiveness¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r? · q3
Currency · newest study 2020 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? All four intervention types showed significant positive effects, but the between-type moderator test was not significant, with only cue-selection tending to exceed cue-attention (p = .029). → Anja Prinz & Stefanie Golke & Jörg Wittwer 2020

Evidence¶

Anja Prinz & Stefanie Golke & Jörg Wittwer 2020¶

Anja Prinz & Stefanie Golke & Jörg Wittwer. (2020). To What Extent Do Situation-Model-Approach Interventions Improve Relative Metacomprehension Accuracy? Meta-Analytic Insights. Educational Psychology Review (2020) 32:917–949. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09558-6

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r?

Mixed-effects moderator analysis over four intervention-type categories (Table 4). The article reports the moderator test was not significant, Q(3) = 4.07, p = .254, R2 = .10, and no Bonferroni-corrected pairwise difference.

"the moderator analysis with intervention type revealed a significant positive average effect of small-to-medium size for the cue-generation encoding-based interventions and the cue-attention intervention, of medium size for the cue-generation retrieval-based interventions, and of large size for the cue-selection intervention"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Retrieval Practice Improves Transfer — related
• Instructional approach, AI technology type, assessment instrument, educational level, and publication year do not significantly moderate AI literacy intervention effects — related
• Different types of handwriting interventions produce equivalent gains in handwriting legibility and fluency — related
• Situation-model-approach interventions also directly improved comprehension, albeit with a small effect — related
• Situation-model-approach interventions produce a medium positive average effect (g = 0.46) on relative metacomprehension accuracy — a broader claim this one bears on
• Comprehension-test expectancy tended to be more effective than delayed-keywords listing and rereading, though interventions did not substantially differ overall — related
• Generative and visualizing tasks improve metacomprehension and monitoring accuracy but show small or null effects on learning outcomes — related
• Intervention effects on relative metacomprehension accuracy did not differ between school and university students — related