In the lab study, distance and relevance of question content did not significantly affect accuracy overall, while AAT score and working-memory capacity each improved it and intensified each other¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Distance (B = −0.289, p = 0.147) and relevance (p = 0.499) had no significant main effect on accuracy; equivalence was not tested. → Britt Hadar 2023 q2 i? Higher AAT scores and higher working-memory capacity (Kmax) each predicted higher accuracy and their effects intensified each other (B = 0.315, p = 0.035). → Britt Hadar 2023 (2)

Evidence¶

Britt Hadar 2023¶

Britt Hadar, Maayan Katzir, Sephi Pumpian, Tzur Karelitz and Nira Liberman. (2023). Psychological proximity improves reasoning in academic aptitude tests. npj Science of Learning 8:10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-023-00158-x

q2 · i? · causal · r2

GLMM on the Study 2 lab data (N = 129) with AAT, Kmax, distance and relevance as predictors. Distance was not significant (B = −0.289, p = 0.147); means were M-proximal = 0.57, M-distal = 0.49. Relevance was likewise non-significant (p = 0.499).

"Distance did not signi ficantly affect accuracy, B = −0.289, SE = 0.199, z = −1.45, p = 0.147, ( M-proximal = 0.57, SD-proximal = 0.19,"

Britt Hadar 2023 (2)¶

Britt Hadar, Maayan Katzir, Sephi Pumpian, Tzur Karelitz and Nira Liberman. (2023). Psychological proximity improves reasoning in academic aptitude tests. npj Science of Learning 8:10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-023-00158-x

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Same GLMM: AAT (B = 0.349, p = 0.009) and Kmax (B = 0.297, p = 0.044) each positively predicted accuracy; the printed AAT × Kmax interaction "indicated that their effects intensi fied each other" (Fig. 3).

"An interaction between these scores, B = 0.315, SE = 0.150, z = 2.103, p = 0.035, indicated that their effects intensi fied each other"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• General Cognitive Ability — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes
• Working Memory — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes

Related Claims¶

• In the lab study, adding irrelevant information impaired performance only among low-working-memory participants in the distal condition — related
• Examinees score higher on academic aptitude test verbal reasoning questions with proximal than with distal content — related
• In a high-stakes field exam, proximity improved performance of low-achieving examinees only on questions containing irrelevant details — related
• With logical structure held constant, proximity improves accuracy of low-achieving participants by 28% — related
• The proximal-content advantage on AAT questions is more pronounced for low-achieving examinees — related