Under reading-only, students with more misconceptions achieved better comprehension, but completing a think sheet removed this effect of misconceptions on comprehension¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? A significant overall interaction between number of misconceptions and instructional method emerged for comprehension (ΔR² = .10, p = .009). → Anja Prinz-Weiß & Elisa Röhm 2025 q3 i? In the control group, more misconceptions predicted significantly better comprehension (b = 0.55, p = .012), whereas the effect was not significant in the think-sheet or think-sheet-reflection groups. → Anja Prinz-Weiß & Elisa Röhm 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

Anja Prinz-Weiß & Elisa Röhm 2025¶

Anja Prinz-Weiß & Elisa Röhm. (2025). To what extent can think sheets with or without reflection prompts support self-regulated learning from text? Metacognition and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-025-09419-z

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Multiple regression analysis on comprehension in the online experiment (N = 92 randomized to three conditions) showed a significant overall interaction, with the article reporting "Δ R2 = .10, F(2, 86) = 5.03, p = .009".

"The analysis on comprehension showed a significant overall interaction between number of misconceptions before studying and instructional method, Δ R2 = .10, F(2, 86) = 5.03, p = .009."

Anja Prinz-Weiß & Elisa Röhm 2025 (2)¶

Anja Prinz-Weiß & Elisa Röhm. (2025). To what extent can think sheets with or without reflection prompts support self-regulated learning from text? Metacognition and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-025-09419-z

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Conditional effects from the same regression showed that in the control group "the number of misconceptions had a significant positive effect on comprehension, b = 0.55"; effects in the think-sheet (b = -0.12, p = .430) and think-sheet-reflection (b = -0.30, p = .090) groups were not significant.

"Unexpectedly, in the control group, the number of misconceptions had a significant positive effect on comprehension, b = 0.55, SE = 0.21, t(86) = 2.57, p = .012."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Think sheets counteracted the positive effect of misconceptions on transfer in the control group, though the overall interaction only approached significance
• Misconceptions did not impair transfer in the strong control condition, but learners with more misconceptions in the think-sheet group transferred better
• Completing the think sheet more accurately was associated with higher comprehension, transfer, and regulation decision adequacy — related
• Adequacy of regulation decisions did not depend on misconceptions or instructional method — related
• Misconceptions impair comprehension of a standard text, and both a refutation text and a think sheet compensate for this detrimental effect — reports the opposite
• 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