standOff, and the article is at its publisher via the link below. When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.| second reading | alternatives | an independent re-reading of a facet, recorded whether or not it agrees |
| relation to other work | claim_relations | how this paper stands to another: agrees, contradicts, extends, qualifies |
| claim type | claim_type | the shape of the claim: existence, mechanism, method, critique, prediction, null |
| concept | concepts | an idea the paper works with, quoted where the paper uses it |
| content tag | content_tags | a finding, definition, quantity, statistic or variable named in the paper |
| control | controls | an experiment run to eliminate a rival explanation |
| limitation | limitations | what the paper says its evidence cannot support |
| mechanism | mechanisms | how the reported effect is said to come about |
| method | method | how the paper produced its evidence |
| phenomenon | phenomenon | the effect or regularity under study |
| sense | senses | a distinct use of a term, quoted where the paper fixes it |
| unrecordable relation | unhoused_relations | a relation the paper asserts that this vocabulary cannot express, with the reason |
This record holds no relations between concepts. A layer is empty when the tagger recorded nothing in it — which is not the same as the paper having nothing to record.
| facet | tag | field | conf. | whose words |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| claim_type | existence Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_type | the paper's words | |
| phenomenon | creative thinking and problem-solving ability in mathematics learning Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | phenomenon | the paper's words | |
| method | behavioural-experiment Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: behavioural-experiment | method | the paper's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[0] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[1] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[2] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | The abstract reports the two abilities TOGETHER as no better than the comparison, and each ability SEPARATELY as better than the same comparison; the three statements do not compose and are not reconciled. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: citing this study for whether STAD cooperative learning outperforms problem-solving learning: the abstract's combined result says no better while both component results say better, and the paper does not state which reading holds | limitations[0] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| limitations | The whole population was used as the sample, so there is no sampling beyond the single class group studied. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the generality of these results: the population is all 60 students of class VII at one school, and the analysis treats the data as coming from a saturated sample | limitations[1] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| limitations | THE ABSTRACT'S THIRD FINDING IS CONTRADICTED BY THE PAPER'S OWN MEANS. It states that problem-solving ability is better under STAD than under problem-solving learning; the reported means are 51.467 for STAD and 62.800 for problem-solving learning, so STAD is 11.3 points WORSE on that measure. The direction of the claim is the opposite of the direction of the data, and both are in this paper. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[2] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| limitations | A standard deviation that cannot come from its own variance: variance 136.585 is reported with SD 111.821, where the square root is 11.687. Four of the six cells are exact to three decimals, so the computation was right and this is a transcription error - but it is printed as a result. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[3] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| limitations | A second impossible standard deviation: variance 145.640 with SD 62.609, where the square root is 12.068. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[4] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| limitations | The whole population of 60 was used, described by the paper as a saturated sample, so the analysis assumes normality and homogeneity of a set that was not sampled from anything wider. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[5] | 0.85 | the tagger's words |
| controls | each student's quiz score compared against that student's own earlier average score Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. eliminates: between-student differences in ability - the comparison is within a pupil, so a rise is a rise relative to how that pupil was already performing · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held | controls[0] | 0.85 | the tagger's words |
| concepts | creative thinking Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: creative thinking | concepts[0] | the paper's words | |
| concepts | problem solving Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: problem solving | concepts[1] | the paper's words | |
| concepts | saturated sample Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: saturated sample | concepts[2] | the paper's words | |
| concepts | creativity Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: creativity | concepts[3] | 0.9 | the paper's words |
| concepts | STAD Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: STAD | concepts[4] | 0.9 | the paper's words |
| unhoused_relations | the abstract's claim that STAD is better for problem solving → the paper's own reported means for that comparison Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. A PAPER CONTRADICTING ITSELF, WHICH NO TYPE CAN EXPRESS. Every claim relations type points at ANOTHER work; there is no way to record that a paper's stated finding runs opposite to the numbers printed in its own results section. Filed here because the alternative is to record only one half and lose the fact that both are present. | unhoused_relations[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| senses | effect of STAD cooperative learning - AS THE COMBINED RESULT: the two abilities taken together are reported as NO BETTER than the comparison method Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[0] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | effect of STAD cooperative learning - AS THE COMPONENT RESULTS: creative thinking is reported as BETTER, and problem solving is reported as BETTER, against the same comparison Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[1] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | creativity - identified with its PRODUCT: the paper states the main criterion in creativity is the product rather than the process Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[2] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | creativity - given three different definitions in a single paragraph, from three cited authors: the PRODUCT of good thinking, the ABILITY to create something new, and the capacity to see relationships among pre-existing elements Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[3] | 0.9 | the tagger's words |
| alternatives | claim_type: existence Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. a second reading reaching the same value. Recorded: existence — note: A BLIND second reading by the project on 2026-08-25: the record's own claim type/method/phenomenon were not looked at until every value here was written and substring-verified. Not applied - a person decides. Sampling frame: the 504 staged records carrying no alternatives block, so this never re-measures the 202. All 11 records with 130+ tags were taken as a census and 19 more spread one per discipline across 22 disciplines - the dense non-neuroscience cell is the one the 202 do not contain (inside them, 94-100% of the densest bands are neuroscience; among these 11, one is)., | alternatives.claim_type | 0.8 | the tagger's words |
| alternatives | method: quasi-experiment Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. a second reading DIFFERING from the recorded value. Recorded: behavioural-experiment — note: A BLIND second reading by the project on 2026-08-25: the record's own claim type/method/phenomenon were not looked at until every value here was written and substring-verified. Not applied - a person decides. Sampling frame: the 504 staged records carrying no alternatives block, so this never re-measures the 202. All 11 records with 130+ tags were taken as a census and 19 more spread one per discipline across 22 disciplines - the dense non-neuroscience cell is the one the 202 do not contain (inside them, 94-100% of the densest bands are neuroscience; among these 11, one is)., | alternatives.method | 0.9 | the tagger's words |
| alternatives | phenomenon: differences in creative thinking and mathematical problem-solving ability between two teaching models Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. a second reading DIFFERING from the recorded value. Recorded: creative thinking and problem-solving ability in mathematics learning — note: A BLIND second reading by the project on 2026-08-25: the record's own claim type/method/phenomenon were not looked at until every value here was written and substring-verified. Not applied - a person decides. Sampling frame: the 504 staged records carrying no alternatives block, so this never re-measures the 202. All 11 records with 130+ tags were taken as a census and 19 more spread one per discipline across 22 disciplines - the dense non-neuroscience cell is the one the 202 do not contain (inside them, 94-100% of the densest bands are neuroscience; among these 11, one is)., | alternatives.phenomenon | 0.85 | the tagger's words |
| claim_relations | builds-on → Slavin's account of cooperative learning Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[0] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | builds-on → Iin Septi Jannah Siregar's study of creative thinking and problem solving under problem-based vs conventional learning Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | two-way ANOVA Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: two-way ANOVA | content_tags.statistics[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Tukey post-hoc test Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Tukey post-hoc test | content_tags.statistics[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | F-test Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: F-test | content_tags.statistics[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Lilliefors normality test Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Lilliefors normality test | content_tags.statistics[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Bartlett test of homogeneity of variance Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.statistics[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | null hypothesis testing Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: null hypothesis testing | content_tags.statistics[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | mean Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: mean | content_tags.statistics[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | variance Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: variance | content_tags.statistics[7] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | standard deviation Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: standard deviation | content_tags.statistics[8] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Taking creative thinking and problem solving together, students taught by STAD cooperative learning were not better than those taught by problem-solving learning on the topic of the circle. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Considered on its own, mathematical creative thinking was better in the STAD group than in the problem-solving-learning group. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Mathematical problem-solving ability was also better in the STAD group than in the problem-solving-learning group. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | The two-way analysis found a significant interaction between the learning model used and which of the two abilities was being measured. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | creative thinking in mathematics Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: creative thinking in mathematics | content_tags.definitions[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | problem solving Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: problem solving | content_tags.definitions[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | ability to solve problems of mathematics Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.definitions[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | cooperative learning Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: cooperative learning | content_tags.definitions[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Student Team Achievement Division Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Student Team Achievement Division | content_tags.definitions[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | subject matter Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: subject matter | content_tags.variables[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | ability of creative thinking Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: ability of creative thinking | content_tags.variables[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | ability of problem solving Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: ability of problem solving | content_tags.variables[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 60 — total class VII population, which is also the study sample under saturated sampling Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | X = 65 — mean creative-thinking post-test score of students taught by STAD cooperative learning Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | X = 52.7 — mean creative-thinking post-test score of students taught by problem-solving learning Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | X = 51.467 — mean problem-solving post-test score of students taught by STAD cooperative learning Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | X = 62.800 — mean problem-solving post-test score of students taught by problem-solving learning Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 5 items — number of description-type test items for each of the two measured abilities Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[5] | the tagger's words |
Tags that could not be placed in the text:
What was deliberately not tagged, and why, is recorded per paper by the tagger. Where a paper has no such record, this page says so rather than implying that nothing was declined.