ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
The screen inferiority depends on test format in reasoning and meta-reasoning tasks.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Does Using None-of-the-Above (NOTA) Hurt Students' Confidence?Journal of Intelligence · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Influential work has confirmed screen inferiority in reading tasks that reading on screen is less productive than reading on paper. Recent researches suggest that poor cognitive performance in screen environments may be primarily due to cognitive defects rather than technological flaws. Although some studies have explored screen inferiority in reasoning tasks from cognitive and metacognitive perspectives, related theories have yet to be enriched. Here, we found that screen inferiority exists in reasoning performance regardless of the test format (multiple-choice VS. open-ended), which may result from shallow processing consistent with the previous findings. However, meta-reasoning monitoring showed screen inferiority only in the multiple-choice test format. Our results indicate that the screens exhibit robust inferiority in reasoning scores, while the influence of the media on meta-reasoning may vary with external triggers. Our research may shed light on how to conduct efficient reasoning in the screen age.
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.