The retention advantage of a pre-lecture external stimulus does not differ significantly by stimulus type (poem, game, or puzzle)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2013 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? An ANOVA across the four external stimulus types (poem1, puzzle, game, poem2) found no statistically significant difference in exam scores. → Rosegard 2013

Evidence¶

Rosegard 2013¶

Rosegard, E., & Wilson, J. (2013). Capturing students' attention: An empirical study. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Vol. 13, No. 5, December 2013. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1017063

q3 · i? · causal · r2

In the same four-year randomized experiment, an ANOVA compared exam scores across the four yearly external stimulus types (poem1, game, puzzle, poem2). The article states "The mean difference among each external stimulus was not statistically significant (p>.05)", so the benefit appears attributable to the stimulus itself rather than a specific form. No effect size is printed.

"An ANOVA was performed to test if there were differences between external stimulus types (i.e., poem1, puzzle, game, poem2). The mean difference among each external stimulus was not statistically significant (p>.05)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Exposing college students to a topic-relevant 90-second external stimulus before a lecture significantly improves immediate information retention compared with a neutral control — related
• A serious virtual world class does not produce statistically significant differences in learning effectiveness compared with a traditional class of identical learning objectives and contents — related
• Poem-enhanced instruction produced higher posttest interest than game-enhanced and modified lecture instruction — related