The null effect of the disfluency × WMC interaction on transfer replicated the primary study's null finding, with both studies showing negative coefficients¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? The disfluency × WMC interaction did not significantly predict transfer performance (β = -1.57, p = 0.804), aligning with the primary study's null result and negative coefficient. → Sophia C. Weissgerber 2024

Evidence¶

Sophia C. Weissgerber 2024¶

Sophia C. Weissgerber, Denia Indah Permatasari Terhorst, Ralf Rummer. (2024). Is the perceptual disfluency effect moderated by working memory capacity? Direct replication of Lehmann et al. (2016). Metacognition and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-023-09366-7

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Regression analysis of transfer performance in the replication (N = 96; model N = 94 per figure note). The model was significant (F(10, 83) = 4.70, p < 0.001, R2 adj. = 0.28), but "their interaction (β = -1.57, SE = 6.28, t(83) = -0.25, p = 0.804) did not significantly predict transfer performance". Because the primary study also found no ATI effect on transfer and both effect sizes were negative, the two studies' findings align; the primary null finding was replicated.

"Disfluency manipulation (β = 1.48, SE = 6.09, t(83) = 0.24, p = 0.808), WMC (fluent: β = 5.87, SE = 5.01, t(83) = 1.17, p = 0.245; disfluent: β = 4.30, SE = 3.88, t(83) = 1.11, p = 0.270), and their interaction (β = -1.57, SE = 6.28, t(83) = -0.25, p = 0.804) did not significantly predict transfer performance."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Disfluency shows no negative effects on learning; the common-sense hypothesis that it harms learning can be rejected
• In a pre-registered direct replication (N = 96), the disfluency × WMC interaction did not significantly predict retention, failing to replicate Lehmann et al. (2016)
• Across the four existing experiments on WMC moderation of disfluency, results are inconsistent: one finds the effect restricted to high-span, one to low-span, and two find null moderation
• Working memory capacity moderated disfluency effects in one study but not another
• Disfluency and WMC × disfluency did not affect extraneous cognitive load, contrary to hypotheses — related
• Disfluency and WMC × disfluency did not affect intrinsic or germane cognitive load — related
• The learning benefits of perceptual disfluency reported by Diemand-Yauman et al. (2011) do not replicate in any general way — related