The spacing benefit on quiz performance is larger for lower-ability students than for higher-ability students¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr2·q2·i0negligible
Currency · newest study 2020 · 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.
q2 i0 Spacing and final exam grade interact in predicting quiz grade: spacing relates to higher quiz performance for lower-ability students but not for higher-ability students. → Paulo F. Carvalho 2020
Evidence¶
Paulo F. Carvalho 2020¶
Paulo F. Carvalho, Faria Sana and Veronica X. Yan. (2020). Self-regulated spacing in a massive open online course is related to better learning. npj Science of Learning 5:2. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-020-0061-1
q2 · i0 · associational · r2
Regression predicting quiz grade from spacing, final exam grade, and their interaction, with pretest and time covariates and random factors. The article reports a "significant spacing by final exam grade interaction, β = −0.04"; marginal effects are plotted in Fig. 3a.
"while there was still an overall benefit of spacing, β = 0.08, SE = 0.01, t(5644) = 5.24, p < 0.001, there was also a significant spacing by final exam grade interaction, β = −0.04, SE = 0.01, t(6017) = −3.12, p = 0.002."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Higher-ability students are more likely to space their study in a self-regulated online course — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-26 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.