PS-I shows no pooled benefit for procedural knowledge (g = −0.03, nonsignificant)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q4 · i0 negligible
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q4 i0 For the subset of comparisons assessing procedural knowledge, the pooled effect size was near zero and not statistically significant, indicating no detected PS-I advantage for procedural skills. → Tanmay Sinha and Manu Kapur 2021

Evidence¶

Tanmay Sinha and Manu Kapur 2021¶

Tanmay Sinha and Manu Kapur. (2021). When Problem Solving Followed by Instruction Works: Evidence for Productive Failure. Review of Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211019105

q4 · i0 · quant-synthesis · r3

Subgroup of the same three-level meta-analysis restricted to the 51 of 166 comparisons assessing procedural knowledge. The pooled effect was "Hedge’s g = −0.03, p = .7384, 95% CI [−0.20, 0.15]", a printed effect size of negligible magnitude; equivalence was not tested.

"For the n = 51/166 comparisons assessing procedural knowledge, results suggested the pooled effect size for procedural knowledge to be Hedge’s g = −0.03, p = .7384, 95% CI [−0.20, 0.15]."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Productive Failure Improves Conceptual Learning — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
• For domain-general skills, one meta-analysis finds a negligible effect (g = −0.17) in favour of I-PS over PS-I — related
• Micro productive failure showed no effect on conceptual explanation, but a condition × time interaction emerged as the I-PS mean advantage at one day reversed at one week — related