Cited by 27Interdisciplinary Research and CollaborationInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsEducational methodologies and cognitive development

Cross-Disciplinary Research on Learning and Instruction – Coming to Terms

Open access
Heitzmann, Nicole, Opitz, Ansgar, Stadler, Matthias, Sommerhoff, Daniel, Fink, Maximilian C., Obersteiner, Andreas, Schmidmaier, Ralf, Neuhaus, Birgit J. +4 more·2021·Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract

OPINION article Front. Psychol., 11 May 2021Sec. Educational Psychology https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.562658

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.562658

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Medical education exhibits specialized AIGC application patterns focused predominantly on diagnostic simulations and clinical reasoning enhancement rather than general content generation.

    “Medical education represents a distinct case, exhibiting specialized application patterns focused predominantly on diagnostic simulations and clinical reasoning enhancement rather than general content generation17.”

    From Integrating AI-generated content tools in higher education: a comparative analysis of interdisciplinary learning outcomes (2025) · cites this paper as [17]

    The Cross-Disciplinary Research Collaborations section (page unavailable) describes medical education researchers participating in a project on diagnostic competence in simulation-based learning environments. It does not discuss AIGC, clinical reasoning enhancement, or whether diagnostic simulations predominate over general content generation in medical education. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • A multi-stage stratified random sampling technique was employed to ensure the representativeness of the sample.

    “A multi-stage stratified random sampling technique was employed to ensure the representativeness of the sample17.”

    From Integrating AI-generated content tools in higher education: a comparative analysis of interdisciplinary learning outcomes (2025) · cites this paper as [17]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) describes a conceptualization of cross-disciplinary research, while the Team section discusses research-team composition. Searches for multi-stage stratified random sampling and representative samples found no passage saying that the paper employed such a sampling technique. (LLM, conf=0.77)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

6 of the 45 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Fam D. O’Rourke M. (eds) (2021). Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Failures: Lessons Learned from Cautionary Tales. London: Routledge.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Heitzmann, N., Opitz, A., Stadler, M., Sommerhoff, D., Fink, M. C., Obersteiner, A., Schmidmaier, R., Neuhaus, B. J., Ufer, S., Seidel, T., Fischer, M. R., & Fischer, F.
Affiliations
  • Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
  • Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education (DE)
  • Institut für Didaktik und Ausbildungsforschung in der Medizin (DE)
  • Technical University of Munich (DE)
  • LMU Klinikum (DE)
Corresponding author
Heitzmann, Nicole
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Published
2021-05-11
Volume
11
Pages
562658-562658
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3162447908
Cited by
27
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4
FWCI
2.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Open access LMU (Ludwid Maxmilian's Universitat Munchen) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion)
  • mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (FOR2385)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Interdisciplinary Research and Collaboration
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational methodologies and cognitive development
Keywords
interdisciplinary research, learning, instruction, educational psychology, research integration

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