Seminar group membership remained a significant predictor of improvement after controlling for pretest scores (η²p = 0.075)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3·i2medium
Currency · newest study 2018 · 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 i2 In an ANCOVA with pretest scores as covariate, seminar membership significantly predicted pretest-to-posttest improvement, F(1, 158) = 12.8, η²p = 0.075. → Simon Cullen 2018
Evidence¶
Simon Cullen 2018¶
Simon Cullen, Judith Fan, Eva van der Brugge and Adam Elga (2018). Improving analytical reasoning and argument understanding: a quasi-experimental field study of argument visualization. npj Science of Learning 3:21. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-018-0038-5
q3 · i2 · causal · r2
ANCOVA using group membership as independent variable and pretest scores as covariate, controlling the pretest–improvement relationship (B = −0.40). Group membership "accounted for a signi ficant proportion of the variance in scores", η²p = 0.075.
"we found a signi ficant effect of membership in the seminar group, B = 1.5, 95% CI: [0.67, 2.34], p < 0.001, which accounted for a significant proportion of the variance in scores, F(1, 158) = 12.8, p < 0.001, η2 p = 0.075"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Seminar students improved more on LSAT Logical Reasoning than control students (d = 0.71, 95% CI (0.37, 1.04), p < 0.001) — related
- Adaptive spaced retrieval practice produced higher end-of-semester posttest performance than learner-directed AI study, but fixed spaced retrieval did not significantly outperform learner-directed study — related
- Learning the CVS with self-generated, vicarious, combined, or no errors during PS-I does not differentially affect CVS posttest performance when controlling for prior knowledge — related
- Objective learning gains did not differ significantly by condition in the primary ANCOVA, but KBD showed a significant positive effect on learning gains in exploratory regressions accounting for learner covariates — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
seminar-ancova-group-effect |
title |
Seminar group membership remained a significant predictor of improvement after controlling for pretest scores (η²p = 0.075) |
description |
Seminar group membership remained a significant predictor of improvement after controlling for pretest scores (η²p = 0.075) |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2018 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-26 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — simon-cullen-2018 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.