In an open simulation game, third-order interventions effectively evoked third-order responses¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitative r? · q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In the open SG, 66 TOL interventions co-occurred 59 times with TOL responses (105 total TOL responses), which the authors read as TOL interventions effectively evoking TOL responses. → Marieke de Wijse-van Heeswijk 2025

Evidence¶

Marieke de Wijse-van Heeswijk 2025¶

Marieke de Wijse-van Heeswijk, Etienne A. J. A. Rouwette, Sander V. Meijerink. (2025). The learning effects of first, second, and third order interventions in a rule-based and open simulation game. Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-025-09715-w

q2 · i? · qualitative · r?

Co-occurrence analysis of open SG case study transcripts coded in Atlas ti. The article reports 66 TOL interventions co-occurring 59 times with TOL responses, a "close match" the authors interpret as effective elicitation.

"TOL interventions: 66 interventions co-occurred 59 times with TOL responses. This close match suggests TOL interventions effectively evoked TOL responses."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Extraneous cognitive load arising from limited scope and high distance in the rule-based game pushed the facilitator toward first- and second-order interventions instead of the third-order interventions the learning goal required — related
• In an open simulation game with wide scope and low distance, second-order interventions effectively elicited second-order responses — related
• In a rule-based simulation game with narrow scope and high distance, facilitator interventions were predominantly first- and second-order and participant learning was mainly first- and second-order — related