ArticleCBE life sciences education2022
Accuracy and Idea Consideration: A Study of Small-Group Interaction in Biology.
Article in CBE life sciences education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Power of Peer Experiences: Shifts in Science Motivation and Impacts on Performance.CBE life sciences education · 2025Article
- Which Group Dynamics Matter: Social Predictors of Student Achievement in Team-Based Undergraduate Science Classrooms.CBE life sciences education · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Small-group discussion is a central component of 21st-century biology classrooms. Many factors shape these discussions and thus influence potential learning gains. This study examined how accuracy and idea consideration shaped small-group discussions in undergraduate biology labs (12 groups, M = 42.8 talk turns). To do this, we asked 1) Is there a relationship between a student's science accuracy and the amount peers consider the student's ideas? 2) To what extent does peer consideration of a student's ideas predict that student's ability to steer the conversation? Building on this second question, we then explored 3) Does general group academic ability or immediate conversational accuracy better predict group learning? To answer these questions, we coded aspects of discourse (science accuracy, idea consideration, etc.) before quantitative analysis. Strong correlation was found between students' science accuracy and idea consideration (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.