Reading comprehension strongly predicts achievement from high-density microtext, unlike other density conditions¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 1988 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 For the high-density CBI group, reading comprehension was the first regression predictor of immediate posttest scores (simple r = .51, R2 = .26, p < .001), while pretest contributed weakly. → Ross 1988 q3 i? In the other density treatments, the pattern reversed: prior achievement entered strongly and reading measures were never selected. → Ross 1988 (2)

Evidence¶

Ross 1988¶

Ross, S. M., Morrison, G. R., & O'Dell, J. K. (1988). Obtaining More out of Less Text in CBI: Effects of Varied Text Density Levels as a Function of Learner Characteristics and Control Strategy. Educational Communication and Technology, 36(3), 131-142. http://www.jstor.org/stable/30218252

q3 · i2 · causal · r2

Stepwise multiple regression for the high-density CBI group (final n = 65), over-sampled to increase reliability. Pretest (simple r = .26) entered second with a weak contribution; no other predictors were entered.

"When immediate posttest scores were treated as the criterion, reading comprehension (simple r = .51) was the first predictor entered in the equation (R2 = .26, p < .001)."

Ross 1988 (2)¶

Ross, S. M., Morrison, G. R., & O'Dell, J. K. (1988). Obtaining More out of Less Text in CBI: Effects of Varied Text Density Levels as a Function of Learner Characteristics and Control Strategy. Educational Communication and Technology, 36(3), 131-142. http://www.jstor.org/stable/30218252

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Comparison regressions on the three remaining standard-density treatments with small n's (24 to 25 subjects). In none of these analyses was either reading measure selected.

"For both the low-density print and low-density CBI groups, only the pretest was selected for entry (R2's = .18 and .49 respectively). For the high-density print group, attitude score was selected first (R2 = .23), followed by the pretest."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• High-density text takes longer to complete than low-density text in self-paced lessons
• Low-density text is as effective as high-density text for achievement in expository CBI and print lessons
• Less skilled readers are more likely to select high-density text under learner control
• Students generally prefer low-density text, selecting it on about 65 percent of learner-control choices