Contrasting examples, correct examples, erroneous examples, and practice problems produced no differences in learning gains or transfer of unbiased-reasoning skills¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? No main effect of Practice Type and no Practice Type × Test Moment interaction on learning items at pretest-to-immediate-posttest or immediate-to-3-week-delayed comparisons. → Lara M. van Peppen 2021 q3 i? No main effect of Practice Type and no interaction on transfer items from immediate to 3-week delayed posttest. → Lara M. van Peppen 2021 (2)

Evidence¶

Lara M. van Peppen 2021¶

Lara M. van Peppen, Peter P. J. L. Verkoeijen, Anita E. G. Heijltjes, Eva M. Janssen, Tamara van Gog. (2021). Enhancing students' critical thinking skills: is comparing correct and erroneous examples beneficial? Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-021-09559-0

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Mixed ANOVAs on learning items (N = 170 pretest-to-immediate; N = 154 to 3-week delay) printed Practice Type and interaction ηp² values of .01–.02, all non-significant (e.g., interaction p = .592 and p = .984). Equivalence was not tested.

"In contrast to Hypothesis 3, the results did not reveal a main effect of Practice Type, nor an interaction between Practice Type and Test Moment"

Lara M. van Peppen 2021 (2)¶

Lara M. van Peppen, Peter P. J. L. Verkoeijen, Anita E. G. Heijltjes, Eva M. Janssen, Tamara van Gog. (2021). Enhancing students' critical thinking skills: is comparing correct and erroneous examples beneficial? Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-021-09559-0

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Mixed ANOVA on transfer items (N = 155, immediate to 3-week delayed posttest) printed Practice Type F(3,151) = 0.76, p = .520 and interaction p = .211; no effect size exceeded ηp² = .03. Equivalence was not tested.

"The results revealed no main effect of Test Moment. Moreover, in contrast to Hypothesis 4, the results did not reveal a main effect of Practice Type, nor an interaction between Practice Type and Test Moment"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Explicit CT instruction combined with practice improves students' unbiased reasoning on instructed and practiced heuristics-and-biases items from pretest to immediate posttest
• Solving practice problems invested less mental effort than contrasting or erroneous examples, contrary to the worked-example-effect hypothesis
• Time-on-task during practice was significantly higher for correct and erroneous examples than for contrasting examples and practice problems
• Erroneous examples produce significantly higher delayed-test learning gains than problem solving for decimal learning — related
• Contrasting erroneous examples were more often effective than correct examples and problem-solving, sometimes equally or more effective than erroneous examples — reports the opposite
• Erroneous examples and problem solving do not differ significantly on an immediate posttest — related
• Performance on practiced reasoning items and on transfer items continued to improve after 3-week and 9-month delays — related
• The delayed erroneous-examples benefit holds for both low and high prior knowledge students — related