Claims

College faculty, staff and administrators rated their preparedness to support student veterans in psychological distress significantly higher after game-based virtual-human role-play training, and still above baseline at 3-month follow-up, in a pre/post study with no control group.

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · checked against its sources 2026-11-03 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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.

q2 i? Participants (758 faculty, staff and administrators; 65% staff) showed statistically significant increases in GBS preparedness composite scores from pretraining to posttraining to 3-month follow-up, F(2, 758) = 927.4, p < .01. → Cate 2015 q2 i? Follow-up preparedness scores were significantly lower than posttraining scores but remained significantly higher than baseline, indicating some reduction over time. → Cate 2015

Evidence

Cate 2015

Cate, C. A., & Albright, G. (2015). Supporting Student Veterans: Utilizing Game-Based Role-Plays with Virtual Humans to Build Military Cultural Competency and Helping Behaviors in Faculty and Staff. Online Learning, 19(1). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1061484

q2 · i? · causal · r1

A quasi-experimental post-hoc study of 758 faculty, staff and administrators (65% staff, 33% full- or part-time faculty) from 20 four-year colleges or universities and four community colleges who completed the 30-minute Veterans on Campus simulation, with no comparison group. A repeated-measures ANOVA on the self-rated GBS preparedness composite (five items on a 5-point scale) showed significant increases across three time points (means 2.94 before, 3.87 after, 3.78 at 3 months), with "statistically significant increases in participants’ GBS preparedness composite score" from pretraining to follow-up. With no control group, the rise follows the training but the design cannot show the training caused it; no effect size is printed for this sample.

"A repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed statistically significant increases in participants’ GBS preparedness composite score to recognize, discuss, motivate, and help student veterans in psychological distress between pretraining, posttraining, and follow-up scores F(2,758) = 927.4, p < . 01."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-03
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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