The intervention improved students' sourcing in credibility judgments and in written products relative to controls¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causalr2·q3·i1small
Currency · newest study 2023 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · 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 The intervention fostered students' attention to source features in their credibility judgments (d = 0.39) and their use of sources in written products (d = 0.37). → Hämäläinen 2023
Evidence¶
Hämäläinen 2023¶
Hämäläinen, E. K., Kiili, C., Räikkönen, E., Lakkala, M., Ilomäki, L., Toom, A., & Marttunen, M. (2023). Teaching sourcing during online inquiry – adolescents with the weakest skills benefited the most. Instructional Science, 51, 135–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-022-09597-2
q3 · i1 · causal · r2
Linear regression analyses of post-test Sourcing in credibility judgments and Sourcing in written product, controlling for corresponding pre-test scores, reading fluency, prior topic knowledge, and topic order; Table 4 reports group effects of d = 0.39 [0.17; 0.61] and d = 0.37 [0.15; 0.58].
"the regression analyses (see Table 4) showed that the intervention fostered students’ attention to source features in their credibility judgments as well as their use of sources in their written products."
Hämäläinen 2023 (2)¶
Hämäläinen, E. K., Kiili, C., Räikkönen, E., Lakkala, M., Ilomäki, L., Toom, A., & Marttunen, M. (2023). Teaching sourcing during online inquiry – adolescents with the weakest skills benefited the most. Instructional Science, 51, 135–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-022-09597-2
q3 · i1 · causal · r2
Baseline descriptive comparison of the intervention (N = 175–191) and control (N = 143–162) groups showed the groups performed equally on all variables except a small pre-test advantage in credibility judgments with printed effect size d = 0.22, which the regressions controlled for.
"In the pretest, the intervention group outperformed the control group only in Sourcing in credibility judgments ( t(342.03) = -2.05, p = .041, d = 0.22)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Individual sourcing gains during the intervention were uneven, with 4–25% of students improving depending on the skill — related
- One-session checklist (CRAAP) instruction in source evaluation did no better than the alternative methods it was compared with in two quasi-experiments — related
- Civic Online Reasoning Instruction Improves Evaluation — related
- Task topic order was associated with sourcing performance and with individual change during the intervention — related
- A teacher-led sourcing intervention increased upper secondary students' use of source features in search queries during online inquiry — related
- Students with the weakest pre-intervention sourcing skills showed the clearest positive change during the intervention — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
sourcing-intervention-improves-credibility-judgments-written-products |
title |
The intervention improved students' sourcing in credibility judgments and in written products relative to controls |
description |
The intervention improved students' sourcing in credibility judgments and in written products relative to controls |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2023 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-18 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
2 — hämäläinen-2023, hämäläinen-2023-2 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.