Post-experimental questionnaire ratings favoured MT-ITS numerically but the differences between conditions were not significant¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr1·q3
Currency · newest study 2023 · 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? Participants in the MT-ITS condition gave more favourable questionnaire ratings than those in the Standard condition, but the differences were not significant. → Vladimir Zotov & Eric Kramkowski 2023
Evidence¶
Vladimir Zotov & Eric Kramkowski 2023¶
Vladimir Zotov & Eric Kramkowski. (2023). Moving-Target Intelligent Tutoring System for Marksmanship Training. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-022-00308-z
q3 · i? · causal · r1
Post-experimental five-point questionnaires on structure, number of targets, usefulness, learning something new, and training merit, summarized in Table 7 with higher MT-ITS means on each item. Equivalence was not tested.
"Overall, the participants in the MT-ITS condition gave more favourable ratings than those in the Standard condition, but the differences were not significant."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- MT-ITS training was especially effective for distant (250m) moving targets — related
- Under blind conditions, students rated GenAI feedback more positively than tutor-generated feedback, with a statistically significant difference only on Genuineness favouring GenAI — related
- Time Management showed a marginally significant post-intervention difference favouring GenAI feedback, while Goal Setting, Help Seeking and Self-Evaluation showed no significant differences — related
- Students showed no statistically significant apprehension about trusting automated feedback validity, and favoured granular automated marginalia over generalised human feedback — related
- The GenAI feedback group showed a statistically significant post-intervention improvement in the Task Strategies dimension of SRL compared with the tutor group — related
- Participants trained with the intelligent AR tutor completed the unassisted physical assembly task significantly faster, with no significant difference in errors — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
mt-its-questionnaire-ratings-not-significant |
title |
Post-experimental questionnaire ratings favoured MT-ITS numerically but the differences between conditions were not significant |
description |
Post-experimental questionnaire ratings favoured MT-ITS numerically but the differences between conditions were not significant |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2023 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-27 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — vladimir-zotov-eric-kramkowski-2023 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.