Claims

Participating in an informal letter-writing assignment did not significantly improve scores on a multiple-choice-only quiz

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2013 · 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? Students in the writing condition scored similarly to controls on the multiple-choice post-test quiz, with no significant ANCOVA difference. → Bersamin 2013

Evidence

Bersamin 2013

Bersamin, M., Zamboanga, B.L. & Orsak-Neff, N. (2013). Understanding course content through letter writing: Do informal writing assignments improve grades? Psychology Teaching Review, 19(1). https://www.bps.org.uk/journal/psychology-teaching-review

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Counterbalanced pre-test/post-test experiment in a lower-division child development course; ANCOVA on the multiple-choice quiz (post-test 1) with pre-test as covariate. The writing group's adjusted mean (M=73.96) was "similar" to controls (M=71.61) with no significant difference; equivalence was not tested.

"individuals in the writing treatment condition (adjusted means: M=73.96, SE=2.56) scored similarly to the control group (M=71.61, SD=2.49). Results from the ANCOVA revealed no significant differences between the two groups"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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