ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
Using process features to investigate scientific problem-solving in large-scale assessments.
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 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.
- Macro- and Micro-Level Behavioral Patterns in Simulation-Based Scientific Inquiry: Linking Processes to Performance Among Elementary Students.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- Cross-Sectional Study on Experience in Musical Instruments and Basic Surgical Skills Acquisition Among Final Year Medical Students.ANZ journal of surgeryArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study investigates the process data from scientific inquiry tasks of Methods: We identify significant associations between item scores and temporal features of preparation time, execution time, and mean execution time. Results: Reflecting, respectively, durations of action planning and execution, and execution efficiency, these process features quantitatively differentiate the high- and low-performing students: in the fair tests, high-performing students tended to exhibit shorter execution time than low-performing ones, but in the exhaustive tests, they showed longer execution time; and in both types of tests, high-performing students had shorter mean execution time than low-performing ones. Discussion: This study enriches process features reflecting scientific problem-solving process and competence and sheds important light on how to improve performance in large-scale, online delivered scientific inquiry tasks.
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.