Claims

Pedagogical agents do not significantly affect learners' engagement (g = -0.02, non-significant)

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

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? Across 57 comparisons from 8 studies, PAs showed a small, non-significant effect on engagement (g = -0.02, p = 0.73). → Gladstone 2025

Evidence

Gladstone 2025

Gladstone, J. R., Schroeder, N. L., Heidig, S., Zhang, S., Palaguachi, C., & Pitera, M. (2025). Do Pedagogical Agents Enhance Student Motivation? Unraveling the Evidence Through Meta-Analysis. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10050-2

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Three-level meta-analysis with CHERVE of PA-versus-non-PA comparisons measuring engagement. The pooled effect was near zero and non-significant, with significant heterogeneity (Q(56) = 217.68, p < 0.001).

"The result of a random effects 3LMA with CHERVE meta-analysis found that the impact of PAs on learners' engagement was small and non-significant (g = − 0.02, p = 0.73, kcomparisons = 57, kstudies = 8)."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id pa-no-effect-engagement
title Pedagogical agents do not significantly affect learners' engagement (g = -0.02, non-significant)
description Pedagogical agents do not significantly affect learners' engagement (g = -0.02, non-significant)
status review
evidence_strength weak
newest_evidence 2025
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-19
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — gladstone-2025

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.