Perceived competence predicts isomorphic test performance and perceived autonomy predicts transfer performance¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i2 Higher perceived competence was associated with better isomorphic posttest performance (η²p = .05), and higher perceived autonomy with better transfer performance (η²p = .04). → Coppens 2019

Evidence¶

Coppens 2019¶

Coppens, L. C., Hoogerheide, V., Snippe, E. M., Flunger, B., & van Gog, T. (2019). Effects of problem–example and example–problem pairs on gifted and nongifted primary school students' learning. Instructional Science, 47, 279–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-019-09484-3

q2 · i2 · causal · r2

Exploratory ANCOVAs with task sequence as independent variable and perceived autonomy and competence as covariates on posttest performance; "participants who rated their competence higher performed better on the isomorphic posttest problems", η²p = .05; autonomy predicted transfer performance, F(1, 120) = 5.58, p = .020, η²p = .04.

"there was a main effect of perceived competence [F (1, 120) = 5.70, p = .018, /u1D7022 p = .05 ], indicating that participants who rated their competence higher performed better on the isomorphic posttest problems"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Self-Efficacy — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes

Related Claims¶

• Example–problem pairs raise perceived competence but not perceived autonomy or enjoyment — related
• Gifted primary students report higher need for cognition, perceived competence and perceived autonomy than nongifted students — related
• Perceived competence predicts autonomous motivation for AI use but not autonomy support for AI use — related
• The example-based course increased perceived competence, but neither the course nor the assistant had a significant effect on perceived choice or pressure — related
• Inattention moderates how baseline competence frustration and baseline autonomy translate into perceived AI benefits, weakening both positive associations — related
• Example–problem pairs are more efficient than problem–example pairs for both gifted and nongifted primary school students — related