Adding reviews or a second demonstration did not significantly improve self-efficacy or learning over the control condition¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Design limits · Hans van der Meij 2018 (2): the intervention came bundled with another change (read from the study by two models, 2026-10-29)
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? For self-efficacy there was no main effect of condition and no time-by-condition interaction. → Hans van der Meij 2018
q3 i? For learning there was no main effect of condition and no time-by-condition interaction, and the transfer test also showed no difference between conditions. → Hans van der Meij 2018 (2)
Evidence¶
Hans van der Meij 2018¶
Hans van der Meij, Jan van der Meij, Tessa Voerman, Evert Duipmans. (2018). Supporting motivation, task performance and retention in video tutorials for software training. Education Tech Research Dev 66, 597–614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9560-z
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Repeated measures ANOVA on initial and final self-efficacy for the control, review, and 2-demo conditions found no condition effect; the expected strongest gain for the review condition was not observed. No effect size was printed for the condition contrast.
"There was no main effect of condition and no interaction between time and condition, F \ 1."
Hans van der Meij 2018 (2)¶
Hans van der Meij, Jan van der Meij, Tessa Voerman, Evert Duipmans. (2018). Supporting motivation, task performance and retention in video tutorials for software training. Education Tech Research Dev 66, 597–614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9560-z
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Repeated measures ANOVA over the four regular task tests found no condition effect on learning; an ANCOVA on the transfer test with pre-test as covariate likewise "revealed no difference between conditions". No effect size was printed for these contrasts.
"Also, there was no main effect of condition and no interaction between time and condition, F \ 1."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Video coverage declined significantly after the preview, and reviews were viewed more fully than second demonstrations — related
- The review tutorial yields higher post-training task relevance than the control, but no condition effect on self-efficacy — related
- Video tutorials significantly and substantially raised self-efficacy, with no effect of condition — related
- Total coverage differed by condition, with the 2-demo tutorial viewed less fully than the control and review tutorials — related
- Video tutorials produced large learning gains from pre-test to training test, with significant decline at later post-tests and no condition effect — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-29 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.