The modality effect on inference-based questions is serially mediated by personal references and comprehensiveness of explanations¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? A significant indirect effect via number of personal references → number of concepts emerged (a1 × d21 × b2 = .09, 95% CI [.010, .313]), with no direct effects via social presence or comprehensiveness alone. → Jacob 2019

Evidence¶

Jacob 2019¶

Jacob, L., Lachner, A., & Scheiter, K. (2019). Learning by Explaining Orally or In Written Form? Text Difficulty Matters. https://aspredicted.org/sv3zv.pdf

q2 · i? · causal · r3

Bootstrapped serial mediation analysis (10,000 simulations, Hayes 2013) with learning activity as predictor, personal references and concepts as serial mediators, and inference-based performance in the high-difficult text as dependent variable. The article reports "a significant indirect effect" with no direct effects via social presence or comprehensiveness.

"Results indicated a significant indirect effect (via number of personal references → number of concepts) of a1 × d21 × b2 = .09, 95% CI [.010, .313], as zero was not included in the confidence interval (see Figure 1, for the full mediation model)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• For the low-difficult text, oral explaining, written explaining, and retrieval practice yield comparable learning outcomes — related
• Oral explanations contain more personal references and more concepts than written explanations, but not more elaborations — related
• Trust in AI and academic self-efficacy serially mediate the literacy-to-continued-use association (literacy → trust → self-efficacy → use) — related
• Text difficulty moderates the effect of explaining modality: oral explaining outperforms written explaining on inference-based questions only for the high-difficult text — related