Item variability shows no overall main effect on generalization in either experiment¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causalr2·q3·i1–i2
Currency · newest study 2026 · 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 i2 In Experiment 1, varied and repeated items groups had similar final-test accuracy (ηp² = .04, p = .076). → Meng Cao & Paulo F. Carvalho 2026
q3 i1 In Experiment 2, varied and repeated items groups again had similar final-test accuracy (ηp² = .02, p = .262). → Meng Cao & Paulo F. Carvalho 2026 (2)
Evidence¶
Meng Cao & Paulo F. Carvalho 2026¶
Meng Cao & Paulo F. Carvalho. (2026). Striking the Balance: How Variability Shapes Retrieval Practice and Worked Examples for Transfer Learning. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-026-10169-w
q3 · i2 · causal · r2
Experiment 1's mixed-effects ANOVA found no significant main effect of variability on final-test accuracy, with printed effect size ηp² = .04 ("F(1,76) = 3.24, p = .076, ηp 2 = .04"); the p-value was marginal but did not reach threshold.
"participants who practiced with varied items and those who practiced with repeated items had similar accuracy on the final test, F(1,76) = 3.24, p = .076, ηp 2 = .04."
Meng Cao & Paulo F. Carvalho 2026 (2)¶
Meng Cao & Paulo F. Carvalho. (2026). Striking the Balance: How Variability Shapes Retrieval Practice and Worked Examples for Transfer Learning. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-026-10169-w
q3 · i1 · causal · r2
Experiment 2's mixed-effects ANOVA likewise found no significant main effect of variability, with printed effect size ηp² = .02 ("F(1,72) = 1.28, p = .262, ηp 2 = .02"); variability mattered only in interaction with strategy.
"participants who practiced with varied items and those who practiced with repeated items had similar accuracy on the final test, F(1,72) = 1.28, p = .262, ηp 2 = .02."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Retrieval practice takes more learning time than worked examples, and variability slows improvement during practice — related
- Without initial instruction, varied retrieval practice matches varied worked examples and beats repeated retrieval practice for generalization — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
variability-no-main-effect-on-generalization |
title |
Item variability shows no overall main effect on generalization in either experiment |
description |
Item variability shows no overall main effect on generalization in either experiment |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2026 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-22 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
2 — meng-cao-paulo-f-carvalho-2026, meng-cao-paulo-f-carvalho-2026-2 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.