Cited by 518Science Education and PedagogyEducational Strategies and EpistemologiesReading and Literacy Development

Promoting Conceptual Change in Science: A Comparative Meta-Analysis of Instructional Interventions from Reading Education and Science Education

Guzzetti, Barbara J., Snyder, Tonja E., Glass, Gene V, Gamas, Warren S.·1993·Reading Research Quarterly

Abstract

Barbara J. Guzzetti, Tonja E. Snyder, Gene V Glass, Warren S. Gamas, Promoting Conceptual Change in Science: A Comparative Meta-Analysis of Instructional Interventions from Reading Education and Science Education, Reading Research Quarterly, Vol. 28, No. 2 (Apr. - May - Jun., 1993), pp. 116-159

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/747886

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • An earlier meta-analysis found that intentionally creating cognitive conflict between prior knowledge and new information is more effective at reducing student misconceptions than simply providing new information.

    “This affirmed the findings of an earlier meta-analysis, which found that intentionally creating cognitive conflict between prior knowledge and new information is more effective at reducing student misconceptions of course content than simply providing new information (Guzzetti et al., 1993).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Guzzetti, B. J., Snyder, T. E., Glass, G. V., & Gamas, W. S.
Venue
Reading Research Quarterly
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1993-04
Volume
28
Issue
2
Pages
116
ISSN
0034-0553 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2089221954
Cited by
518
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 41 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 26
FWCI
11.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Reading Research Quarterly (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
Keywords
conceptual change, science education, reading instruction, educational intervention, reading comprehension, scientific literacy, reading comprehension strategies

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