University students' self-efficacy showed no significant change during a unit of short-term prompting in learning journals¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr?·q3·i1small
Currency · newest study 2024 · checked against its sources 2026-10-19 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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 i1 Self-efficacy showed no statistically significant change over the four prompted journals of unit 1 (a failure to detect change; equivalence was not tested), F(2.72,198.68)=2.27, p=.09, ηp²=0.03. → Nadja M. Gentner 2024
Evidence¶
Nadja M. Gentner 2024¶
Nadja M. Gentner, Lisa Respondek, Tina Seufert. (2024). Effects of short- and long-term prompting in learning journals on strategy use, self-efficacy, and learning outcomes. Instructional Science (2024) 52:919–950. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-024-09671-x
q3 · i1 · causal · r?
Repeated-measures ANOVA on the MSLQ self-efficacy scale administered in the standardized part of journals t1–t4, contradicting hypothesis H2. The authors read this as "no change in learners’ self-reported self-efficacy during unit 1" (ηp² = 0.03), but the test only failed to detect a significant change; equivalence was not tested, so it does not show that self-efficacy stayed the same.
"Analysis indicated no main effect of time, F(2.72,198.68) = 2.27, p = .09, η p² = 0.03. The results indicate no change in learners’ self-reported self-efficacy during unit 1"
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Motivation — outcome: instruction changes it
- Self-Efficacy — outcome: instruction changes it
Related Claims¶
- Continuing prompts long-term in learning journals confers no additional benefit: self-reported strategy use and self-efficacy decline across the second unit in both the short-term and long-term conditions, while the quantity of cognitive strategy use in the journals stays stable — related
- Self-efficacy, but not self-reported strategy use, predicts subsequent exam grades in the university course — related
- Short-term prompting in weekly learning journals increases university students' self-reported metacognitive strategy use over time — related
- Students’ prompt self-efficacy increased significantly after the scaffolded GenAI course (t = 3.729, p < .001) — related
- Short-term creativity interventions can be effective in changing creativity positively — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
short-term-prompts-do-not-change-self-efficacy |
title |
University students' self-efficacy showed no significant change during a unit of short-term prompting in learning journals |
description |
University students' self-efficacy showed no significant change during a unit of short-term prompting in learning journals |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2024 |
source_checked |
2026-10-19 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-18 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — nadja-m-gentner-2024 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.