Claims

Keeping a structured learning diary without further intervention did not improve university students' self-regulation

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2014 · 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? Students who only kept a structured learning diary showed no improvement in self-regulation compared to untreated students. → Fabriz 2014

Evidence

Fabriz 2014

Fabriz, S., Dignath-van Ewijk, C., Poarch, G., Büttner, G. (2014). Fostering self-monitoring of university students by means of a standardized learning journal—a longitudinal study with process analyses. Eur J Psychol Educ, 29, 239–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-013-0196-z

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Quasi-experimental comparison across four university courses with pre–post measures and process analyses; diary-only students were compared to students who received no treatment. The study reports that diary-keeping alone "did not improve students’ self-regulation." No effect size is printed.

"Results revealed that keeping a structured learning diary without any further intervention did not improve students’ self-regulation."

Studies bearing on this claim

Does keeping a learning diary by itself improve learners' self-regulation, or only when it comes with self-regulation training or prompts? This table gathers the studies behind this claim and the 9 narrower claims that bear on it: 5 distinct studies (4 causal, 1 review), q2–q3, 1 of 5 with an effect size coded. One row per study, codes as each entry records them; no effect is averaged and no verdict is drawn. Built by scripts/synthesize_claim.py from eval/synthesis/; a row that looks wrong is fixed on the claim it comes from.

Study Design Effect as recorded Bears on this claim through
Fabriz 2014 q2 · causal · r1 i? this claim; Students who only kept learning diaries showed a decrease in their motivation (supports); Combining a structured learning diary with instruction on self-regulated learning increase (qualifies)
Bellhäuser 2022 q3 · causal · r2 i? A daily learning diary alone (Group D) did not produce statistically significant pre-post (supports); Web-based SRL training combined with a learning diary (Group TD) produced statistically si (qualifies); SRL interventions in a four-week online mathematics preparation course did not significant (qualifies)
Nückles 2020 q2 / q3 · review · r2 i?; i2 Without instructional support, learners show low cognitive strategy use and almost absent (supports); Instructionally supported (prompted) journal writing outperforms unsupported journal writi (qualifies)
Broadbent 2020 q3 · causal · r2 i? In a randomised control study, university students in the combined condition (online SRL t (qualifies)
Sven Scheu 2026 q3 · causal · r2 i? Using the chatbot-based journaling system improves self-reported SRL strategy use from pre (counts against)

Discussion

Learner Variables

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id learning-diary-alone-no-self-regulation-gain
title Keeping a structured learning diary without further intervention did not improve university students' self-regulation
description Keeping a structured learning diary without further intervention did not improve university students' self-regulation
status review
evidence_strength moderate
newest_evidence 2014
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-15
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — fabriz-2014

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