Medium moderated disfluency effects on reasoning: disfluent text fostered calibration and performance on screen but not on paper¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In Sidi et al.'s Experiment 2, an interaction between medium and disfluency showed disfluency on screen led to more accurate calibration and better performance, which did not hold on paper. → Tim Kühl & Alexander Eitel 2016

Evidence¶

Tim Kühl & Alexander Eitel 2016¶

Tim Kühl & Alexander Eitel. (2016). Effects of disfluency on cognitive and metacognitive processes and outcomes. Metacognition and Learning, 11, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-016-9154-x

q2 · i? · review · r2

Narrative review of Sidi et al. (2015), university students solving CRT reasoning tasks on screen versus paper. The review reports the medium-by-disfluency interaction in Experiment 2; no effect size is printed.

"Results suggest that disfluency on screen indeed led to more accurate metacognitive monitoring (calibration), and in turn, to better performance. On paper, this was not the case"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Disfluency affected metacognitive monitoring (JOLs) only under specific conditions: within-subjects manipulation with unrelated word pairs, or on screen rather than paper — related
• Disfluency increased study times without improving performance, suggesting time was spent deciphering text rather than processing contents more deeply — related
• Working memory capacity moderated disfluency effects in one study but not another — related
• All 13 special-issue studies failed to show overall better performance due to disfluency — related
• GCL-raising activations did not improve learning outcomes: neither prompted imagination nor disfluency produced a significant task-performance advantage — related
• Variations in cognitive activation are reflected in the germane cognitive load scale: prompted imagination and disfluent text raise GCL — related
• Medium of presentation interacts with font fluency: disfluent font yields higher success rates on computer but lower on paper
• Reading text and presenting graphics on handheld screens are more difficult than on paper, and interactivity may be compromised — related
• Disfluency does not automatically elicit effortful processing; test expectancy improves retention and transfer while disfluency has no effect — related
• Neither disfluency nor distinctiveness affected memory across three experiments with alien-list stimuli — related
• Low to medium disfluency does not harm learning and sometimes descriptively improves it, though the effect is unstable — related