Prompted and control groups show no significant differences in separative elaborations within domains or in additions¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? No significant differences were found for elaborations within domains or for additions across the three conditions. → Lehmann 2024

Evidence¶

Lehmann 2024¶

Lehmann, T. (2024). Bridging domains: examining the effects of relevance instructions and guiding questions on pre-service teachers' first- and second-order knowledge integration. Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-023-09655-3

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Follow-up ANOVAs in the three-group essay-coding analysis found no condition effect on the separative measure elaborations within domains (p = .138) or on additions (p = .561); equivalence was not tested.

"No significant differences were found for elaborations within domains, F(2,80) = 2.028, p = .138, ηp2 = 0.048, or for additions, F(2,80) = 0.582, p = .561, ηp2 = 0.014."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Relevance instructions and guiding questions both improve pre-service teachers' first-order knowledge integration in a reading- and writing-based learning setting with three domain-specific texts
• Prompts increased learners' self-efficacy during learning within the prompted group but did not produce between-group differences at mid-learning or post-learning — related
• Continuing prompts long-term in learning journals confers no additional benefit: self-reported strategy use and self-efficacy decline across the second unit in both the short-term and long-term conditions, while the quantity of cognitive strategy use in the journals stays stable — related