ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
The effects of note-taking methods on lasting learning: the role of motivation and cognitive load.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. 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.
- The Relationship Between Social-Emotional Learning Skills and Learning Motivation Among University Students: Exploring the Roles of Emotional Intelligence and Emotion Regulation.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This randomized controlled experimental study examined the effects of four note-taking methods (Cornell, Parallel, Digital, and Sentence) on lasting learning (retention) in primary-level teacher candidates, while also exploring the roles of learning motivation and cognitive load. Methods: A total of 134 participants were randomly assigned to three experimental groups (Cornell, Parallel, Digital) and one control group (Sentence). Following a one-session orientation, the intervention spanned 5 weeks (2 h/week). Measures included a researcher-developed Academic Achievement Test (pre-, post-, retention), a validated Learning Motivation Scale (pre-, post-), and a single-item cognitive load rating collected after each lesson. Analyses used mixed ANCOVA with Bonferroni-corrected post-hoc tests and regression analyses. Results: Mixed ANCOVA revealed significant main effects of time and group, whereas the time × group interaction was not significant. Post-hoc tests showed no significant pairwise differences at post-test; at retention, only the Cornell group scored significantly higher than the Sentence group. Motivation increased significantly in the Cornell and Parallel groups, while Digital and Sentence showed no significant pre-post change. Cognitive load differed by method, with Digital reporting significantly lower load than Parallel and Sentence. Regression analyses indicated that motivation was significantly associated with retention, whereas cognitive load was not. Conclusions: Overall, retention differences were limited and observed only for the Cornell-Sentence comparison. Learning motivation showed the most consistent association with retention scores, whereas cognitive load showed no significant association with retention in the regression analyses.
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.