Claims

Prior problem-based discussion does not change the number of inaccurate propositions recalled

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2001 · 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? There was no significant difference between conditions in the number of inaccurate propositions recalled. → W.S. de Grave 2001

Evidence

W.S. de Grave 2001

W.S. de Grave, H.G. Schmidt & H.P.A. Boshuizen. (2001). Effects of problem-based discussion on studying a subsequent text: A randomized trial among first year medical students. Instructional Science 29: 33-44. https://link.springer.com/journal/11251

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Secondary ANOVA from the same randomized recall study showing the accuracy gain came from more accurate propositions, not from more errors; no effect size printed. Equivalence was not tested.

"There was no significant difference in the number of inaccurate propositions recalled (F(1,46) = 0.01, MSe = 12.90, p< 0.92)"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id pbl-discussion-no-change-in-inaccurate-recall
title Prior problem-based discussion does not change the number of inaccurate propositions recalled
description Prior problem-based discussion does not change the number of inaccurate propositions recalled
status review
evidence_strength moderate
newest_evidence 2001
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-18
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — ws-de-grave-2001

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