Misconceptions did not impair transfer in the strong control condition, but learners with more misconceptions in the think-sheet group transferred better¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? The overall interaction between misconceptions and instructional method on transfer was significant. → Anja Prinz 2021 q3 i? In the think-sheet group, misconceptions had a significant positive effect on transfer, contrary to the transfer hypothesis; no compensatory effect could emerge because misconceptions had no negative effect on transfer in the control group. → Anja Prinz 2021 (2)

Evidence¶

Anja Prinz 2021¶

Anja Prinz, Stefanie Golke, Jörg Wittwer. (2021). Counteracting detrimental effects of misconceptions on learning and metacomprehension accuracy: The utility of refutation texts and think sheets. Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-021-09535-8

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Regression analysis on transfer (comprehension of an educational research report requiring application of covariance knowledge) in the randomized experiment. The omnibus interaction was significant: "∆R2 = .08, F(2, 86) = 4.05, p = .021".

"The analysis on transfer showed that there was a significant overall interaction between misconceptions and instructional method, ∆R2 = .08, F(2, 86) = 4.05, p = .021."

Anja Prinz 2021 (2)¶

Anja Prinz, Stefanie Golke, Jörg Wittwer. (2021). Counteracting detrimental effects of misconceptions on learning and metacomprehension accuracy: The utility of refutation texts and think sheets. Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-021-09535-8

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Conditional effect in the same transfer regression: in the think-sheet group "misconceptions had a significant positive effect, b = 0.66, SE = 0.21, t(91) = 3.17, p = .002". Effects in the control and refutation-text groups were not significant.

"However, in the think-sheet group, misconceptions had a significant positive effect, b = 0.66, SE = 0.21, t(91) = 3.17, p = .002 (see Fig. 8)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Misconceptions impair comprehension of a standard text, and both a refutation text and a think sheet compensate for this detrimental effect — related
• Learners with more misconceptions who completed a think sheet were more underconfident in predicting their transfer performance — related
• Learners with more misconceptions made more overconfident comprehension predictions after a standard text with a misconception list, an association not seen with refutation texts or think sheets — related
• Completing a think sheet yields higher response-confidence accuracy than reading a refutation text or a standard text with a misconception list — related
• Under reading-only, students with more misconceptions achieved better comprehension, but completing a think sheet removed this effect of misconceptions on comprehension
• Completing the think sheet more accurately was associated with higher comprehension, transfer, and regulation decision adequacy — related
• Think sheets counteracted the positive effect of misconceptions on transfer in the control group, though the overall interaction only approached significance — reports the opposite
• Students with more misconceptions before studying more strongly underestimated their transfer performance, regardless of instructional method — reports the opposite
• Misconceptions were addressed in nine reviewed articles, all in science, via augmented activation, refutation texts, or analogical reasoning, though one study found activating inaccurate information may not be detrimental — related