Response-time propensities show moderate to strong within-student stability across practice session slices¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q2
Currency · no dated study recorded · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Student-level response-time propensity estimates are stable across session quartiles, with early-to-late correlations around r = .55, supporting an individual-differences interpretation. → stability-1

Evidence¶

stability-1¶

Conrad Borchers, Lijin Zhang, Kexin Yang, Tomohiro Nagashima, and Benjamin W. Domingue. 2026. Understanding Student Effort Using Response-Time Propensities During Problem Solving. Proceedings of the Thirteenth ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale (L@S '26). https://doi.org/10.1145/3774398.3811624

q2 · i? · associational · r2

Cross-slice correlation analysis of student random-effect estimates from the response-time propensity model, fit to step-level logs from eight algebra tutoring deployments (794 students). The article reports early-to-late stability of "𝑟=. 55(Q1–Q4)" and the strongest adjacent-slice association at Q3–Q4.

"Response-time propensities showed moderate to strong stability across practice, with correlations between early and later slices ranging from 𝑟=. 51(Q1–Q3) to 𝑟=. 55(Q1–Q4), and the strongest association observed between adjacent late slices (Q3–Q4; 𝑟=. 64)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Higher prior proficiency is associated with faster step-level response-time propensities — related
• RT propensity shows no reliable main effect on learning rate, while prior proficiency is positively associated with learning rate — related
• The RT propensity–learning relationship is strongest early in the class session and attenuates later — related
• The association between RT propensity and learning rate is moderated by prior proficiency: slower propensities predict greater learning efficiency for higher-proficiency students but are weakly negative for lower-proficiency students — related