Claims

Utility value manipulation, but not choice, increases voluntary requests for statistics resources, a behavioral indicator of emerging individual interest

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r? · q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? The directly-communicated utility value manipulation increased the odds of requesting regression resources by 1.35 times relative to control (OR = 1.35, p = .042); the choice manipulation had no influence (OR = 1.02, p = .885). → Asher 2025

Evidence

Asher 2025

Asher, M. W., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2025). Using Choice and Utility Value to Promote Interest: Stimulating Situational Interest in a Lesson and Fostering the Development of Interest in Statistics. Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000921

q3 · i? · causal · r?

Meta-analyzed logistic regression of the binary resource-request outcome across Studies 1–7. The utility value manipulation "increased the odds that participants requested regression resources by 1.35 times relative to control, OR = 1.35, p = .042"; 39.2% of utility value participants versus 33.2% of controls requested resources.

"the directly-communicated utility value manipulation increased the odds that participants requested regression resources by 1.35 times relative to control, OR = 1.35, p = .042, suggesting that the manipulation promoted emerging individual interest in statistics."

Discussion

Learner Variables

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-25
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.