Claims

Not teaching ethical guidelines predicted better combined learning outcomes, while guideline coverage supported only knowledge

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesis r3 · q1–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? In the pooled meta-regression, courses that did not teach ethical guidelines showed a significant positive effect (coefficient 0.35, p < .05) relative to superficial coverage. → Johannes Katsarov 2021 q3 i? The authors propose that attitudinal and behavioral learning may be hampered by reactance when learners are expected to adopt evaluations they have not concluded autonomously. → Johannes Katsarov 2021 (2)

Evidence

Johannes Katsarov 2021

Johannes Katsarov, Roberto Andorno, André Krom, Mariëtte van den Hoven. (2021). Effective Strategies for Research Integrity Training—a Meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review (2022) 34:935–955. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09630-9

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3

Pooled meta-regression of all 75 effect sizes (F = 8.62, p = 0.000); Table 4 reports a coefficient of 0.35* [0.09, 0.61] for not teaching ethical guidelines versus superficial coverage. The coefficient is a regression coefficient, not a standardized effect size.

"Significant positive effects were found for a practical engagement with conc rete cases, for courses that did not teach ethical guidelines, and for courses of more than 5 h (in comparison to shorter courses)."

Johannes Katsarov 2021 (2)

Johannes Katsarov, Roberto Andorno, André Krom, Mariëtte van den Hoven. (2021). Effective Strategies for Research Integrity Training—a Meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review (2022) 34:935–955. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09630-9

q1 · i? · quant-synthesis · r?

Authors' interpretive explanation offered in the Discussion for why guideline coverage did not benefit higher-order outcomes; it is a theoretical interpretation attributed to reactance theory, not a tested result in this article.

"An explanation for this paradoxical finding could be that attitudinal and behavioral learning is hampered through reactance when people are expected to adopt evaluations that they have not concluded autonomously (Worchel and Brehm, 1971)."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id rcr-guideline-coverage-paradox
title Not teaching ethical guidelines predicted better combined learning outcomes, while guideline coverage supported only knowledge
description Not teaching ethical guidelines predicted better combined learning outcomes, while guideline coverage supported only knowledge
status review
evidence_strength moderate
newest_evidence 2022
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-19
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 2 — johannes-katsarov-2021, johannes-katsarov-2021-2

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