Claims

Middle-term ToM and SIP training improves preschoolers' social problem solving more than free play

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2016 · 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 i3 A repeated measures ANOVA showed significant time-by-group interactions on the RES total and RES Question 3 in favor of the experimental group. → Houssa and Nader-Grosbois 2016 q3 i3 The trained group produced fewer wrong/no justifications and more intersubjective-level justifications than controls. → Houssa and Nader-Grosbois 2016 (2)

Evidence

Houssa and Nader-Grosbois 2016

Marine Houssa, Nathalie Nader-Grosbois. (2016). Experimental Study of Middle-term Training in Social Cognition in Preschoolers. Journal of Education and Training Studies. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v4i1.972

q3 · i3 · causal · r2

Randomized experiment with 48 preschoolers (24 per group) in 15 sessions. The interaction on RES total was significant, "F(1,23) = 8.54, p = .005, η²p = .16"; Question 3 showed F(1,23) = 9.10, p = .004, η²p = .17.

"A repeated measure ANOVA showed significant time by group interactions on the SIP measure in favor of the experimental group. This interaction is significant for the RES total ( F(1,23) = 8.54, p = .005, η²p = .16)"

Houssa and Nader-Grosbois 2016 (2)

Marine Houssa, Nathalie Nader-Grosbois. (2016). Experimental Study of Middle-term Training in Social Cognition in Preschoolers. Journal of Education and Training Studies. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v4i1.972

q3 · i3 · causal · r2

Same repeated measures ANOVA on justification levels: wrong/no justification interaction "F(1,23) = 16.59, p = .00, η²p = .27" and intersubjective level "F(1,23) = 4.01, p = .051, η²p = .08".

"for two levels of justification ( wrong/no justification: F(1,23) = 16.59, p = .00, η²p = .27 and inter-subjective level: F(1,23) = 4.01, p = .051, η²p = .08)"

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.