Claims

Instructional personalization did not significantly affect learning outcome or BtBC

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2022 · 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? Neither learning outcome nor BtBC differed significantly between personalized and nonpersonalized instruction. → Yafeng Pan 2022

Evidence

Yafeng Pan 2022

Yafeng Pan, Suzanne Dikker, Yi Zhu, Cuirong Yang, Yi Hu and Pavel Goldstein. (2022). Instructor-learner body coupling reflects instruction and learning. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-022-00131-0

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Linear mixed-effects models in the same dyadic experiment found no significant main effect or interaction of Instructional Personalization on learning outcome. Exploratory models on instructor motion and BtBC vs learners' pre-test performance also showed no significant effects (βs < 0.54, ps > 0.14), suggesting instructors may have failed to adaptively adjust teaching.

"The main effect of Instructional Personalization (β = 1.20, SE = 2.20, t = 0.54, p = 0.59) and the interaction effect (β = −3.13, SE = 3.12, t = −1.01, p = 0.32) were not significant."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id personalization-null-body-coupling
title Instructional personalization did not significantly affect learning outcome or BtBC
description Instructional personalization did not significantly affect learning outcome or BtBC
status review
evidence_strength weak
newest_evidence 2022
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-26
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — yafeng-pan-2022

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