Teams with part-task congruent tools adjusted their representations across phases—broad causal representations first, then more selective algebraic specification—unlike single-tool teams¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2012 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · 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? Compared to the mismatched condition, matched teams represented more relationships during the problem–solution phase (with more errors) and fewer relationships during the solution–evaluation phase (with fewer errors). → B. Slof 2012
q3 i? Causal-only teams represented significantly more concepts and relationships than simulation-only teams. → B. Slof 2012 (2)
Evidence¶
B. Slof 2012¶
B. Slof, G. Erkens, P. A. Kirschner, J. Janssen, J. G. M. Jaspers. (2012). Successfully carrying out complex learning-tasks through guiding teams' qualitative and quantitative reasoning. Instr Sci 40:623–643. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-011-9185-2
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Content analysis of phase-related representations (coded against expert representations via MEPA) compared matched and mismatched teams; the quote reports the t-tests for relationship counts and errors in each phase, with no effect sizes printed.
"Compared to teams in the mismatched condition, teams in the matched condition significantly represented (1) more relationships during the problem–solution phase ( t(14) = 2.77, P = 0.03) but made more errors representing them (t(14) = 4.18, P = 0.00), (2) fewer relationships during the solution–evaluation phase ( t(14) =- 2.29, P = 0.05) but made fewer errors representing them (t(14) =- 3.59, P = 0.00)."
B. Slof 2012 (2)¶
B. Slof, G. Erkens, P. A. Kirschner, J. Janssen, J. G. M. Jaspers. (2012). Successfully carrying out complex learning-tasks through guiding teams' qualitative and quantitative reasoning. Instr Sci 40:623–643. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-011-9185-2
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Content analysis comparing the two partly matched conditions found causal-only teams represented more concepts and relationships than simulation-only teams; only t and p values are printed, no effect sizes.
"Compared to teams in the simulation-only condition, teams in the causal-only condition represented significantly more concepts ( t(16) = 2.56, P = 0.02) and relationships (t(16) = 4.24, P = 0.00)."
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Algebraic Thinking — outcome: instruction changes it
Related Claims¶
- Teams in the matched condition had more elaborate discussions of the domain than teams in the mismatched condition, especially about relations and mathematical relationships — related
- Learners in the matched condition exhibited more meta-cognitive and cognitive activities—monitoring, preparation, and ending discussions—than learners in other conditions — related
- Teams receiving part-task congruent representational tools (causal then simulation) outperformed teams with partly matched or mismatched tools on a complex business-economics learning task — related
- No significant performance difference was found between the causal-only and simulation-only conditions, nor between the mismatched and partly matched conditions — related
- Recall from bar graphs is more accurate when the recall format matches the studied graph format, a small effect that the content's thematic emphasis can override — a broader claim this one bears on
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
matched-tools-phase-appropriate-representations |
title |
Teams with part-task congruent tools adjusted their representations across phases—broad causal representations first, then more selective algebraic specification—unlike single-tool teams |
description |
Teams with part-task congruent tools adjusted their representations across phases—broad causal representations first, then more selective algebraic specification—unlike single-tool teams |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2012 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-18 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
2 — b-slof-2012, b-slof-2012-2 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.