Research on teaching: Process-product research findings and the feelings of obviousness.
Abstract
To address the charge that research findings are obvious, this study examined the perceived obviousness of 12 findings of process-product research on teaching. Twelve hundred and fifteen volunteers in Singapore and in the San Francisco Bay Area rated the degree of obviousness of each finding after (a) attempting to select the actual finding from two possible opposite outcomes, (b) reading a single outcome that was either the actual or the direct opposite of the actual finding, or (c) reading a single outcome plus an explanation for the outcome. The selections of actual findings and the ratings of obviousness of actual or opposite-of-actual findings indicated that respondents could not always distinguish the true findings from their opposites. Explanations tended to increase the rated obviousness of the findings. Differences in gender, knowledge about teaching, and cultural background had inconsistent effects on the judgments of obviousness.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Common sense beliefs are difficult to let go because they feel right and obvious, and this sense of certainty is a product of hindsight bias.
“Common sense beliefs are very difficult to let go of because they feel so right, so obvious.This sense of certainty, or “obviousness,” is a product of the hindsight bias (Watts, 2011;Wong, 1995).”
From Lessons from the field: Isn't it just common sense? Naïve realism as a barrier to learning (2024) · cites this paper as Wong, 1995
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 24 · Cited by 19
- Authors
- Wong, L. Y.-S.
- Affiliations
- Nanyang Technological University (SG)
- Corresponding author
- Wong, Lily Yee-Sheung
- Venue
- Journal of Educational Psychology
- Published
- 1995-09
- Volume
- 87
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 504-511
- ISSN
- 0022-0663 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-2176
- OpenAlex
- W2118802281
- Cited by
- 19
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 2.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Educational Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Research and Methods
- Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
- Keywords
- research outcomes, teaching, gender differences, cultural background, knowledge of teaching
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review