Non-interactive teaching produces stronger under-confidence (metacognitive bias) than restudy immediately after learning¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r1 · q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Non-interactive teaching led to stronger under-confidence compared to restudy, measured as bias (predicted minus actual score). → Lachner 2025

Evidence¶

Lachner 2025¶

Lachner, A., Russ, H., Hübner, N., Sibley, L., & Scheiter, K. (2025). When Does Learning by Non-interactive Teaching Work? A Large-Scale Analysis of Learner Characteristics in a Classroom Setting. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10060-0

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r1

In the same IPD synthesis (N = 1074), metacognitive bias was computed as the difference between students' predicted score and their actual score, where "negative values indicate under-confidence". Teaching produced "stronger under-confidence compared to restudy".

"Results showed that non-interactive teaching resulted in higher immediate scientific knowledge and stronger under-confidence compared to restudy but did not enhance long-term retention."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Language proficiency moderates the effect of non-interactive teaching on immediate monitoring accuracy — related
• Non-interactive teaching does not enhance long-term retention relative to restudy at eight weeks — related
• Non-interactive teaching yields higher immediate scientific knowledge than restudy in secondary physics classrooms — related
• Participants substantially overestimated their performance in all trace conditions, with the largest overestimation under full traces — related
• Delayed JOL bias: multiple text readers are underconfident, rereaders overconfident at one day, and single readers overconfident at one week — related
• Meta-analyses report a small but significant advantage of non-interactive teaching over control, with large between-study variability