ReviewTrends in neuroscience and education2024
Why and how to collect representative study samples in educational neuroscience research.
Review in Trends in neuroscience and education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEducational neuroscience research, which investigates the neurobiological mechanisms of learning, has historically incorporated samples drawn mostly from white, middle-class, and/or suburban populations. However, sampling in research without attending to representation can lead to biased interpretations and results that are less generalizable to an intended target population. Prior research revealing differences in neurocognitive outcomes both within- and across-groups further suggests that such practices may obscure significant effects with practical implications. BARRIERS: Negative attitudes among historically marginalized communities, stemming from historical mistreatment, biased research outcomes, and implicit or explicit attitudes among research teams, can hinder diverse participation. Qualities of the research process including language requirements, study locations, and time demands create additional barriers. SOLUTIONS: Flexible data collection approaches, community engaugement, and transparent reporting could build trust and enhance sampling diversity. Longer-term solutions include prioritizing research questions relevant to marginalized communities, increasing workforce diversity, and detailed reporting of sample demographics. Such concerted efforts are essential for robust educational neuroscience research to maximize positive impacts broadly across learners.
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.