Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
30 lines (26 loc) · 1.6 KB

targetOutcomes.md

File metadata and controls

30 lines (26 loc) · 1.6 KB

Target Outcomes

Article ID: 1-6-2014 PS

For this article you should focus on the findings reported for Study 1 in section "Laptop versus longhand performance".

Specifically, you should attempt to reproduce all descriptive and inferential analyses reported in the text below and associated tables/figures:

Laptop versus longhand performance. Mixed fixed and random-effects analyses of variance were used to test differences, with note-taking medium (laptop vs. longhand) as a fixed effect and lecture (which talk was viewed) as a random effect. We converted the raw data to z scores because the lecture assessments varied in difficulty and number of points available; however, results did not differ when raw scores were analyzed.4 On factual- recall questions, participants performed equally well across conditions (laptop: M = 0.021, SD = 1.31; longhand: M = 0.009, SD = 1.02), F(1, 55) = 0.014, p = .91. However, on conceptual-application questions, laptop participants performed significantly worse (M = −0.156, SD = 0.915) than longhand participants (M = 0.154, SD = 1.08), F(1, 55) = 9.99, p = .03, ηp2 = .13 (see Fig. 1).5 Which lecture participants saw also affected performance on conceptual-application questions, F(4, 55) = 12.52, p = .02, ηp2 = .16; however, there was no significant interaction between lecture and note-taking medium, F(4, 55) = 0.164, p = .96.

Note Make sure to use the original article for additional context and information about any necessary pre-processing steps. Also check for additional supplementary materials that may provide supporting documentation for analysis procedures.