Neither time nor the condition-by-time interaction significantly affected goal attainment over the five-week intervention¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? There was no main effect of time on goal attainment and no significant interaction between time and condition. → Martins van Jaarsveld 2025

Evidence¶

Martins van Jaarsveld 2025¶

Martins van Jaarsveld, G., Wong, J., Baars, M., Specht, M., & Paas, F. (2025). Enhancing goal attainment in higher education with a scripted conversational agent: Effects of monitoring and reflection support in digital learning. Computers and Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2025.105441

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Mixed-design ANOVA within the same RCT reported no significant main effect of time and no significant time-by-condition interaction on goal attainment; hypotheses H1b and H1c were not supported.

"Additionally, there was no main effect of time on goal attainment, F(3, 240) = 1.967, p = .120, η2p = .024, and the interaction between time and condition was not significant, F(9, 240) = 0.835, p = .584, η2p = .030."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Monitoring support delivered via a scripted conversational agent significantly improves goal attainment compared with reflection-only and control conditions — related
• No supplemental intervention was significantly better than another, and gains were not tied to program type — related
• Presentation condition does not differentially affect microstructure comprehension over five weeks, though VNT and NT groups improved while the text-only group did not — related
• Neither the workshop nor the one-on-one intervention affected enrollment in the following semester — related