In a high-stakes field exam, proximity improved performance of low-achieving examinees only on questions containing irrelevant details¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (3 entries) · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? A three-way distance × AAT × relevance interaction emerged in the field study (B = 0.047, p = 0.015), despite a non-significant distance × AAT interaction. → Britt Hadar 2023 q2 i? Among low-achieving examinees, irrelevant information impaired accuracy (p = 0.003), and distance interacted with relevance so accuracy was lower on distal-irrelevant questions (p = 0.030). → Britt Hadar 2023 (2) q2 i? For below-average-AAT examinees, proximal questions (M = 0.52) outperformed distal questions (M = 0.48) by 7%, but only when irrelevant details were included. → Britt Hadar 2023 (3)

Evidence¶

Britt Hadar 2023¶

Britt Hadar, Maayan Katzir, Sephi Pumpian, Tzur Karelitz and Nira Liberman. (2023). Psychological proximity improves reasoning in academic aptitude tests. npj Science of Learning 8:10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-023-00158-x

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Field experiment embedded in a consequential national AAT (N = 1744, two waves, 2018 and 2019), distance between participants, relevance within participants. The distance × AAT × relevance interaction emerged (p = 0.015) while distance × AAT alone was not significant.

"Although the interaction between distance and AAT score was not signi ficant, B = 0.005, SE = 0.023 z = 0.232, p = 0.817, a three-way interaction between distance, AAT, and relevance emerged, B = 0.047, SE = 0.019, z = 2.43, p = 0.015,"

Britt Hadar 2023 (2)¶

Britt Hadar, Maayan Katzir, Sephi Pumpian, Tzur Karelitz and Nira Liberman. (2023). Psychological proximity improves reasoning in academic aptitude tests. npj Science of Learning 8:10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-023-00158-x

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Follow-up of the Study 3 three-way interaction: high achievers were unaffected by relevance, distance or their interaction (p = 0.503, 0.890, 0.880), whereas "the perfor-mance of low-achieving examinees was impaired by adding irrelevant information"; distance also interacted with relevance (p = 0.031), with accuracy lower on distal-irrelevant questions (p = 0.030).

"the perfor-mance of low-achieving examinees was impaired by adding irrelevant information B = −0.146, SE = 0.050, z = −2.91, p = 0.003."

Britt Hadar 2023 (3)¶

Britt Hadar, Maayan Katzir, Sephi Pumpian, Tzur Karelitz and Nira Liberman. (2023). Psychological proximity improves reasoning in academic aptitude tests. npj Science of Learning 8:10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-023-00158-x

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Descriptive means from the Study 3 field data for below-average-AAT examinees on irrelevant-added questions: "performance on proximal questions ( M = 0.52) was higher compared to distal questions ( M = 0.48) by 7%"; no effect size was printed.

"For participants with below-average AAT score, performance on proximal questions ( M = 0.52) was higher compared to distal questions ( M = 0.48) by 7%, but only when the questions were made more dif ficult by including irrelevant details."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• In the lab study, adding irrelevant information impaired performance only among low-working-memory participants in the distal condition — related
• The proximal-content advantage on AAT questions is more pronounced for low-achieving examinees — related
• In the lab study, distance and relevance of question content did not significantly affect accuracy overall, while AAT score and working-memory capacity each improved it and intensified each other — related
• Examinees score higher on academic aptitude test verbal reasoning questions with proximal than with distal content — related
• With logical structure held constant, proximity improves accuracy of low-achieving participants by 28% — related
• GazeTutor's attention-aware reorientation improved deep reasoning learning gains for high aptitude learners — related