Claims

The immediate knowledge advantage for vision over touch-only does not persist at three-week follow-up

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r? · q3
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 i? At the 3-week follow-up, no significant main effect of condition was found on the knowledge test concerning the first showroom. → Magdalena Novak & Stephan Schwan 2021

Evidence

Magdalena Novak & Stephan Schwan 2021

Magdalena Novak & Stephan Schwan. (2021). Does Touching Real Objects Affect Learning? Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09551-z

q3 · i? · causal · r?

In the follow-up (n = 83 across the three object-present conditions), ANCOVA on the 12-item knowledge test (M = 7.32, SD = 1.53) controlling for prior knowledge, interest, and objects inspected found "no significant main effect for condition"; equivalence between conditions was not tested.

"we found no significant main effect for condition, F(1, 80) = 5.10, p =. 0 0 8 ,ηp2 =0 . 1 1 ."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id knowledge-showroom1-no-followup-effect
title The immediate knowledge advantage for vision over touch-only does not persist at three-week follow-up
description The immediate knowledge advantage for vision over touch-only does not persist at three-week follow-up
status review
evidence_strength moderate
newest_evidence 2021
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-22
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — magdalena-novak-stephan-schwan-2021

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