The keyword-quality–JOL correlation increases after comparison with expert keywords, indicating learners exploit keyword quality as a cue only when given external standards¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3·i2medium
Currency · newest study 2021 · 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 i2 Intraindividual gamma correlations between keyword quality and JOLs increased significantly from T1 to T2 for the keyword+comparison group but not for the keyword-only group (ηp2 = .077). → Waldeyer 2021
Evidence¶
Waldeyer 2021¶
Waldeyer, J., & Roelle, J. (2021). The keyword effect: A conceptual replication, effects on bias, and an optimization. Metacognition and Learning, 16, 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09235-7
q3 · i2 · causal · r2
Planned contrast (weights 1 vs. −1) on intraindividual Goodman-Kruskal gamma correlations between rated keyword quality (scored against expert keywords by two raters, all ICCs > .85) and JOLs. The correlation increased only with external standards, t(63) = 2.24, p = .014 (one-tailed), ηp2 = .077.
"intraindividual correlations between participants ’ keyword quality and JOLs increased statistically significantly from the first to the second measurement time point for the keyword+comparison group but did not increase for the keyword group, t(63) = 2.24, p = .014 (one-tailed), ηp2 =. 0 77"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Generating or comparing keywords had no substantial effect on posttest learning performance
- Comparing self-generated keywords with expert keywords increases bias, specifically underconfidence — related
- The quality of sixth-graders' keywords is not diagnostic of intra-individual variation in test performance (Experiment 1). — related
- Teachers' intra-individual monitoring accuracy of students' text-by-text learning is not better than chance and is not improved by students' keywords or summaries (Experiment 1). — related
- Organizational cues during a lecture have a large effect on understanding of lecture structure and memory for details — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
keyword-quality-jol-correlation-increases-with-expert-standards |
title |
The keyword-quality–JOL correlation increases after comparison with expert keywords, indicating learners exploit keyword quality as a cue only when given external standards |
description |
The keyword-quality–JOL correlation increases after comparison with expert keywords, indicating learners exploit keyword quality as a cue only when given external standards |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2021 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-19 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — waldeyer-2021 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.