No-review, spaced review, and spaced oral review conditions yielded about the same mean post-film scores¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r? · q2
Currency · newest study 1952 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Mean post-film scores were about the same for no-review, spaced review, and spaced oral review conditions. → Miller 1952

Evidence¶

Miller 1952¶

Miller, J., Levine, S., and Kanner, J. (1952). A Study of the Effects of Different Types of Review and of Structuring Sub-Titles on the Amount Learned from a Training Film. Memo Report No. 17, Human Resources Research Laboratories, Bolling Air Force Base. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED063741

q2 · i? · causal · r?

The results section reports that "mean post-film scores" for the no-review, spaced review, and spaced oral review conditions "were about the same"; this is a descriptive comparison without printed statistics.

"(c) The mean post-film scores of the conditions for ttno-review," spaced review, and 'Cspaced reviewmoral only" were about the same."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• No significant differences in learning among sub-titling conditions — related
• Massed review at end of film produced significantly greater learning than no review or spaced review — related
• Spaced recall quizzing significantly improves overall post-test performance on fundamental mathematics without harming learning of current material — related