The recall benefit of prior problem-based discussion applies to both explanatory and descriptive propositions, with no interaction between treatment and proposition type¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (3 entries) · causalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2001 · checked against its sources 2026-10-24 (automated, 3 of 3 entries) · 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? The number of explanatory and descriptive propositions in recall did not differ significantly, and there was no significant treatment-by-type interaction. → W.S. de Grave 2001
q3 i? Explanatory propositions were recalled significantly more by the 'Stinging incident' group than by the control group. → W.S. de Grave 2001 (2)
q3 i? Descriptive propositions were also recalled significantly more by the 'Stinging incident' group than by the control group. → W.S. de Grave 2001 (3)
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
ANOVA of the same randomized recall study shows the predicted interaction was absent; the article says the hypothesis of a relatively greater number of explanatory propositions "is not confirmed by the data".
"the number of explanatory and descriptive propositions in the recall did not differ significantly, F(1.46) = 0.03, MSe = 29.28, p< 0.86. Neither is there any significant interaction between treatment and type of proposition, F(1.46) = 0.01, MSe = 29.28, p < 0.98"
W.S. de Grave 2001 (2)¶
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
ANOVA on accurate explanatory propositions in the recall study: the experimental group (mean 25.0) recalled more than the control group (mean 20.1), a significant difference.
"The average number of explanatory propositions accurately produced by the experimental group, however, differs significantly from the average number of accurate declarative propositions produced by the control group F(1,46) = 6.24, MSe = 44.44, p< 0.05"
W.S. de Grave 2001 (3)¶
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
ANOVA on accurate descriptive propositions: experimental mean 25.1 versus control mean 20.3; the authors conclude problem analysis improves memory for both proposition kinds.
"The number of descriptive propositions during recall of the 'Stinging incident' problem group also turns out to be significantly higher than of the control group F(1,46) = 6.54, MSe = 41.53, p< 0.05. Apparently, both kinds of propositions are remembered better due to problem analysis"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Propositional knowledge showed a prior knowledge main effect but no instructional method × prior knowledge interaction — related
- Problem-based tutorial discussion of a relevant problem before studying an expository text increases the number of accurate propositions recalled from that text — related
- Problem-based discussion prior to studying a text does not increase the number of inferences during immediate free recall — related
- Prior problem-based discussion does not change the number of inaccurate propositions recalled — related
- Analyzing a problem before reading facilitates subsequent recall of a relevant text for both novices and experts — related
- Problem analysis through small-group discussion particularly stimulates the production of explanatory propositions, via a significant treatment-by-proposition-type interaction — reports the opposite
- The text-recall benefit of problem analysis is confined to explanatory propositions; descriptive facts are not better remembered — reports the opposite
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
pbl-recall-benefit-general-not-explanation-specific |
title |
The recall benefit of prior problem-based discussion applies to both explanatory and descriptive propositions, with no interaction between treatment and proposition type |
description |
The recall benefit of prior problem-based discussion applies to both explanatory and descriptive propositions, with no interaction between treatment and proposition type |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2001 |
source_checked |
2026-10-24 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-18 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
3 — ws-de-grave-2001, ws-de-grave-2001-2, ws-de-grave-2001-3 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.