A hierarchical organization facilitates tasks only when matched to the task domain: organization A aids deductive tasks and organization B aids historical tasks¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 1979 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Evidence quality · No study behind this claim is a peer-reviewed article with a DOI: it rests on an ERIC document (a report, conference paper or thesis). It is kept because 6 design pages cite it; treat it as a lead to check, not an established finding.

Subclaims¶

q2 i? High-school subjects with the A organization performed consistently better on deductive (type a) tasks, while subjects with the B organization performed consistently better on historical (type b) tasks. → Eylon 1979 q2 i? The difference score (Ca - Cb) depended significantly on input version A or B, but not on acquisition-task strength or ability. → Eylon 1979 (2)

Evidence¶

Eylon 1979¶

Eylon, Bat-Sheva; Reif, F. (1979). Effects of Internal Knowledge Organization on Task Performance. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED171804

q2 · i? · the article prints no effect size for this finding · causal · r2

Experiment 2: 20 students in an advanced high-school physics class, blocked by ability and randomly assigned to treatments inducing organization A (deductive information at higher levels) or B (historical at higher levels); tested two weeks later on both task types. The consistent pattern held on every one of the cued-recall and problem-solving tasks.

"As predicted, subjects with the A organization performed consistently better on tasks of type a, while subjects with the B organization performed consistently better un tasks of type b."

Eylon 1979 (2)¶

Eylon, Bat-Sheva; Reif, F. (1979). Effects of Internal Knowledge Organization on Task Performance. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED171804

q2 · i? · causal · r2

ANOVA on the difference score between composite type-a and type-b task scores in Experiment 2 showed a significant input-version effect [F(1,12)=6.45, p<0.03], with no significant effect of strong versus weak acquisition tasks or of ability.

"An analysis of variance (input version x acquisition tasks, blocked by 5 levels of ability) shows that this difference score depends signifi-cantly on the input version A or B (F(1,12) . 6,45,p < 0.03]"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Graphic Organizers Support Novice Comprehension — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
• Advance organizers produce a small average learning benefit, larger for high-ability than for low-ability learners — related
• A hierarchical internal knowledge organization facilitates performance on complex recall and problem-solving tasks more than a single-level organization of the same knowledge — related
• Information at higher levels of an acquired hierarchical organization is recalled better than information at lower levels — related
• Ability moderates the hierarchical-organization advantage: low-ability subjects showed no significant benefit, while medium-ability subjects did — related
• Strong acquisition tasks explicating the organization produce better internalization than weak tasks asking only for a structured summary — related
• Structural signals show no consistent recall benefits but can aid deeper understanding measured by problem-solving tests — related
• Hierarchical versus single-level organization does not significantly affect performance on local tasks relying only on individual detailed steps — related
• Hierarchical top-down schema-based instruction improved transfer performance compared with single-level and control instruction — related
• The scale measures only the ability to recall definite facts promptly, a limited kind of historical ability — related