Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA)
01 Jan 2010-Vol. 1, pp 20-26
About: The article was published on 2010-01-01. It has received 861 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Analysis of covariance.
Citations
More filters
Queen Mary University of London1, Durham University2, University of Bristol3, Charité4, National Institutes of Health5, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine6, University of Southampton7, University of Tasmania8, AstraZeneca9, University of Edinburgh10, Cardiff University11, Medical Research Council12, University of Florida13, University of Sydney14, Janssen Pharmaceutica15, University of Bern16
TL;DR: The ARRIVE guidelines are revised to update them and facilitate their use in practice and this explanation and elaboration document was developed as part of the revision.
Abstract: Improving the reproducibility of biomedical research is a major challenge. Transparent and accurate reporting is vital to this process; it allows readers to assess the reliability of the findings and repeat or build upon the work of other researchers. The ARRIVE guidelines (Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments) were developed in 2010 to help authors and journals identify the minimum information necessary to report in publications describing in vivo experiments. Despite widespread endorsement by the scientific community, the impact of ARRIVE on the transparency of reporting in animal research publications has been limited. We have revised the ARRIVE guidelines to update them and facilitate their use in practice. The revised guidelines are published alongside this paper. This explanation and elaboration document was developed as part of the revision. It provides further information about each of the 21 items in ARRIVE 2.0, including the rationale and supporting evidence for their inclusion in the guidelines, elaboration of details to report, and examples of good reporting from the published literature. This document also covers advice and best practice in the design and conduct of animal studies to support researchers in improving standards from the start of the experimental design process through to publication.
961 citations
TL;DR: As a remedy against fake news on social media, this work examines the effectiveness of three different mechanisms for source ratings that can be applied to articles when they are initially published.
Abstract: As a remedy against fake news on social media, we examine the effectiveness of three different mechanisms for source ratings that can be applied to articles when they are initially published: exper...
141 citations
23 Jul 2020
TL;DR: Heckhausen and Gollwitzer as mentioned in this paper proposed the Rubicon model of action phases, which describes the course of action as a temporal, linear path starting with a person's wishes or desires and ending with the evaluation of the action outcomes achieved.
Abstract: In the mid-1980s, Heckhausen and Gollwitzer set out to analyze how people control their actions (see Heckhausen, Gollwitzer, & Weinert, 1987). They quickly realized that breaking action control down into different phases greatly benefited its understanding. Heckhausen and Gollwitzer’s analysis was heavily influenced by the work of Kurt Lewin (e.g., Lewin et al., 1944), for whom there was never any doubt that motivational phenomena can only be properly understood and analyzed from an action perspective that distinguishes the processes of goal setting from those of goal striving, an insight that went unheeded for several decades. Accordingly, Heckhausen and Gollwitzer (1987) proposed the “Rubicon”model of action phases, which describes the course of action as a temporal, linear path starting with a person’s wishes or desires and ending with the evaluation of the action outcomes achieved. The model was designed to raise and help answer the following questions: How do people select their goals? How do they plan the execution of goal striving? How do they enact these plans? Moreover, how do they evaluate their accomplishments? According to the Rubicon model, a course of action involves a phase of deliberating the desirability and feasibility of one’s wishes at the outset in order to arrive at a binding decision regarding which of them one wants to pursue as a goal (pre-decisional phase), a phase of planning concrete strategies for achieving this goal Practical Summary
127 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors compared the mathematical word problem-solving performance and computational skills of students who received schema-based instruction (SBI) with those who received general strategy instruction (GSI).
Abstract: The authors examined the effectiveness of strategy instruction taught by general educators in mixedability classrooms. Specifically, the authors compared the mathematical word problem-solving performance and computational skills of students who received schema-based instruction (SBI) with students who received general strategy instruction (GSI). Participants were 60 3rd-grade student participants randomly assigned to treatment conditions. Teachers pretested and posttested participants with mathematical problem-solving and computation tests, repeatedly measuring their progress on word problem solving across the 18-week intervention. Both SBI and GSI conditions improved word problem-solving and computation skills. Further, results show a significant difference between groups on the word problem-solving progress measure at Time 1, favoring the SBI group. However, this differential effect did not persist over time. The authors discuss implications for future research and practice.
116 citations