Skip to main content

Table 1 Descriptive statistics and ANOVA results for knowledge, diagnostic accuracy, and cognitive load

From: Learning to diagnose accurately through virtual patients: do reflection phases have an added benefit?

 

Concluding reflection

Accompanying reflection

Control group

F

df

p

Conceptual knowledge - pretest

0.52 (0.13)

0.57 (0.14)

0.53 (0.13)

1.80

2, 115

0.169

Strategic knowledge - pretest

0.50 (0.14)

0.50 (0.15)

0.50 (0.13)

0.03

2, 108

0.973

Diagnostic accuracy in VPs - pretest

0.45 (0.31)

0.49 (0.34)

0.47 (0.28)

0.24

2, 115

0.785

Diagnostic accuracy in VPs - learning phase

0.56 (0.25)

0.59 (0.16)

0.55 (0.19)

0.46

2, 117

0.630

Diagnostic accuracy in VPs - posttest

0.44 (0.33)

0.37 (0.31)

0.34 (0.33)

1.03

2, 117

0.360

Cognitive load control variables

 Extraneous CL

2.96 (0.88)

2.81 (0.68)

2.77 (0.73)

0.71

2, 118

0.493

 Intrinsic CL

3.31 (0.95)

3.18 (0.79)

3.30 (0.85)

0.28

2, 118

0.759

 Germane CL

2.55 (0.97)

2.46 (0.79)

2.52 (0.82)

0.11

2, 118

0.899

  1. Note. Descriptive statistics and results of one-way ANOVAs for knowledge, diagnostic accuracy, and cognitive load across the three experimental conditions. Diagnostic accuracy and knowledge ranged from (0) entirely incorrect to (1) entirely correct. In concluding reflection, reflection phases took place after completing each case. In accompanying reflection, reflection phases took place halfway through each case. In the control group, no reflection phases were provided. Cognitive load variables were measured once directly after the learning phase and ranged from (1) very low to (5) very high
  2. VPs virtual patients, CL cognitive load