Participating in a relevant group discussion, whether explaining or listening, raises immediate recall relative to an irrelevant discussion, but this advantage does not persist one month later¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3 · i1–i2
Currency · newest study 2011 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 Immediately after the discussion, explainers and listeners together had higher recall than the control condition that discussed an unrelated problem (r = 0.27). → Floris M. van Blankenstein 2011 q3 i1 After one month, explainers and listeners no longer had higher recall than the control condition (t(67) = 1.49, p = .14, r = 0.18). → Floris M. van Blankenstein 2011 (2)

Evidence¶

Floris M. van Blankenstein 2011¶

Floris M. van Blankenstein, Diana H. J. M. Dolmans, Cees P. M. van der Vleuten, Henk G. Schmidt. (2011). Which cognitive processes support learning during small-group discussion? The role of providing explanations and listening to others. Instructional Science 39, 189–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-009-9124-7

q3 · i2 · causal · r2

Planned contrast on immediate recall in the randomized three-condition experiment: the combined relevant-discussion conditions outscored the irrelevant-discussion control, "t(67) = 2.31, p\ .05 (two-tailed), r = 0.27".

"Planned contrasts revealed that, directly after the group discussion, the participants who had given explanations (M = 57.50, SD = 22.72) or listened (M = 54.63, SD = 15.01) had higher recall scores than the participants in the control condition (M = 44.86, SD = 17.99), t(67) = 2.31, p\ .05 (two-tailed), r = 0.27."

Floris M. van Blankenstein 2011 (2)¶

Floris M. van Blankenstein, Diana H. J. M. Dolmans, Cees P. M. van der Vleuten, Henk G. Schmidt. (2011). Which cognitive processes support learning during small-group discussion? The role of providing explanations and listening to others. Instructional Science 39, 189–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-009-9124-7

q3 · i1 · causal · r2

Planned contrast on delayed recall in the same experiment: the combined relevant-discussion conditions did not outscore the control at one month, "t(67) = 1.49, p = .14, r = 0.18"; the immediate advantage of mere participation faded.

"the participants who had provided explanations (M = 49.29, SD = 19.71) or listened during the radar discussion (M = 39.04, SD = 13.56) had no higher recall scores than the participants in the control condition (M = 38.05, SD = 13.72), t(67) = 1.49, p = .14, r = 0.18."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The immediate advantage of deep-processing prompts does not persist at a 5-month follow-up, with a Bayesian test confirming the null — related
• On a delayed assessment 1 to 3 months later, many students transferred their appreciation of variation to another context and could explain the meaning of variation — related
• Immediately after the discussion, participants who explained did not recall more than participants who only listened — related
• Providing explanations during a small-group discussion yields better recall of subsequently studied text one month later than only listening to the discussion — related
• Immediate task success does not establish learning that persists without AI support — a broader claim this one bears on
• Problem-based discussion prior to studying a text does not increase the number of inferences during immediate free recall — related